User talk:Stylez995/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Stylez995, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Teahouse logo

Hi Stylez995! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Osarius (talk).

Visit the Teahouse
We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Ross Burkinshaw - User complaint : Kierenp1995

Hi, this user - User_talk:Kierenp1995 who you have previously warned keeps making un-constructive, badly written, unsourced, autobiographical edits to Ross Burkinshaw. Due to the nature of the content, Im almost certain that its being written by the boxer himself... could you look into it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.192.145 (talk) 20:28, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

You've been reverted again. And Kierenp1995 wrote a message to you on your talk page. And decided to take out his/her frustrations on another article. Not a big deal, but it just looked wrong.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:02, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

WP:AIV report

Hi there. I just wanted to let you know that I had to decline your report at WP:AIV regarding Kierenp1995. The situation you described is too complex for the AIV board. That board is intended only for admins to make snap judgments about situations where someone is very obviously in the wrong, like adding profanity or nonsense characters to articles. Because the situation is more complex, it needs to be reported to a venue where the user in question has the opportunity to defend himself, which isn't possible at AIV. Try Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, (ANI), which is a venue for admins to be made aware of more complex situations. –Darkwind (talk) 11:07, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Inappropriate templates

Please do not restore an inappropriate template to an article talk page, nor issue an erroneous warning to me for removing it. Thank you, 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 15:04, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia account deletionGaju77777777 (talk) 15:13, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Delete my account. Im tired of wikipedia editing and vandalizing. See my edit history. Can u pls delete my first ever wiki account??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaju77777777 (talk • contribs) 16:18, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

@Gaju77777777: Im sorry, I'm not an administrator. And is not possible to delete any accounts in Wikipedia, even by administrators. For more info, see Wikipedia:Username_policy#Deleting_and_merging_accounts. However, I see you were blocked by an admin because the reason added by the admin who blocked you are you are clearly not here to build an encyclopedia. Thank you --Stylez995 (talk) 18:24, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

Thanks for your recent contributions and cleaning up Wikipedia! A tasty cheeseburger for your hard work! NgYShung huh? 11:05, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Jang Yee-un misspelling

The correct spelling of this person's name is Jang Yeeun. That is the WP:COMMONNAME and the form used at the target article CLC (band)#Members. See also Google News results:

  1. CLC Yeeun has 80 Google News hits;
  2. CLC "Ye-eun" has 54 (see Revised Romanization of Korean#Features: "It is permitted to hyphenate syllables in the given name, following common practice");
  3. CLC "Yee-un" (i.e. the form used in the redirect Jang Yee-un) has zero hits, because the hyphen is not placed correctly.

I have requested the creation of Jang Yeeun at WP:AFC/R and will move the categories to that redirect once it is created. Please don't blindly revert this. Regards, 210.6.254.106 (talk) 11:30, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

@210.6.254.106: Hello, because you may forgot to add link to the edit summary before editing, so the editors will understand why. That why i blindly reverted it. Please add this reason and link in the edit summary before editing., to avoid further (blind) reverts made by me and/or other editors. Thank you. Stylez995 (talk) 11:37, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
If you are unsure whether an edit to a redirect needs to be reverted or not, your first response should be to check the target article or query the editor, rather than jumping to the conclusion that it's incorrect. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 11:40, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
@210.6.254.106: OK, thanks for your tips.
TIP: consider creating an account as you are editing as anonymous IP editor. This will gain rights to edit semi-protected pages after when the account is 4 days old and has more than 10 edits, and your IP-address will be hidden when saving edits as logged-in account. Stylez995 (talk) 11:51, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Conversation better held here

I know why you added the template, I'm well aware of what is happening. In the arc of my Wikipedia participation, I too once went thru a templating people phase. It was blissfully short, because a wise Wikipedian took me aside and told me that never helps. Ever. Especially if an old hand is being lectured by a relative newcomer, especially if you are reacting to their angry removal of a template with... another template. If you're trying to poke them until they blow up so they can get blocked, then it works. If you're trying to help, it doesn't. Hopefully this makes sense, and your own templating people phase is short too. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:05, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

@Floquenbeam: Thanks. Can i remove my reply, or the template before the user attacks me as well? Stylez995 (talk) 17:11, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Since others have commented now, maybe better to just leave it alone, and let Cassianto remove it if he wants to. I'm not sure - I'm not in his head - but I suspect that would be best. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:15, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Donald Trump and white supremacy

Does his page look similar to one you nominated for deletion? 220 of Borg 09:22, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

And who is the sockmaster?--Ymblanter (talk) 09:32, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
@220 of Borg:, I didn't nominate the page for deletion, but i'm doubt it looks similar to the deleted page because of numerous unneeded amounts of poorly formatted citations. But now, the page is deleted because of the same criteria as previous one (CSD G10), and the user who created these pages (User:Content is King) are now indefinitely blocked.
And @Ymblanter:, I'm don't know who is the sockmaster of the account. The Checkuser can check who is the sockmaster of the account. Stylez995 (talk) 09:57, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, I thought you templated the page. Facepalm Facepalm But it's gone now, so all good! :-D 220 of Borg 10:04, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Ambavade village vs Ambadave village

I have edited Ambavade to Ambadave because, this Ambadave is associated with origin of father of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. There was no relation with Ambavade village, but it is with Ambadave village. If you want to verify the actual name of village, which associated with Dr.B.R.Ambedkar, kindly visit that village and ask the villagers what they call it. You wrongly mentioned Ambavade, without verifying facts. Kindly note that this will give wrong impression to readers. Even on google map, it was mentioned Ambavane. It is also wrong. When I decided to visit this village, I have never found lead to it. But, when reached that village, I came to know that authors wrongly wrote on Ambavade. Now it is opt to you whether you want to correct it or not. I am Professor of Economics, in Pune, India. I can not write wrong but correct if it is wrong. If you want to continue with wrong name and you may continue because it is your page and property.

regards Dr.Kailas Thaware — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kailash70 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

@Kailash70: Not all editors in the Wikipedia visited the village. Reliable sources is most important on Wikipedia. All information should be sourced to reliable sources from third party sites on the internet. A single, or few editors claims without sources doesn't help. Please note: Verifiability, not truth. In the article, there is a source, that you removed without explanation in the past, says Ambevade, by The Times of India. When i searched "Ambavade" on Google, i found some results relating to this village, and when i searched for "Amadave", i found some sources, relating to this village. Here's the source i found on Google: http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-ambedkar-s-village-gifts-land-for-college-1792761, and they said "Ambadave".
Also, i searched on Google Maps, and i found "Ambavade", but not "Ambadave".
It could be a name confusion between "Ambevade" and "Ambedave", but it could be difficult to make consensus there, because a source from the official site would be good for the name change.
Also, you claimed that i "own the page"? No. Please note that no one "owns the article" in the Wikipedia, and when saving the page, editors agree that their contributions will be released, so anyone can edit the page, anytime, as well being released under Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) and GFDL license. Please read Wikipedia:Ownership of content policy.
Also please remember to sign your posts to talk pages next time by adding four tildes, like this: ~~~~ at the end of your post. Thank you. --Stylez995 (talk) 18:51, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

I am from Maharashtra State and I know how pronounce the village name. You are trying to pronounce Marathi names with different tone. I give board installed by Government on the road side which mentioned Ambadave. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kailash70 (talk • contribs) 19:19, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

some photographs are here https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mandangad-Bankot_road_to_Ambadave.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Way_to_Ambadave.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kailash70 (talk • contribs) 19:39, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Generally, truth prevails and not internet search for you. When Government installed board on the way, you do not trust, but you believe news paper articles, as reliable source. You read another source, which correctly gave name Ambadave- http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-ambedkar-s-village-gifts-land-for-college-1792761, and they said "Ambadave". Do you trust this source and Government Board installed on the road side, if you do not trust both, it does mean that you do not want to trust anybody except you.Kailash70 (talk) 20:09, 4 November 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kailash70 (talk • contribs) 19:47, 4 November 2016 (UTC) Hello user Stylez995

Certainly you will find name Fauji Ambavade and Ambavade Bk and Ambavane too. Can you hide truth about Ambadave, which is related Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and family. You are trying to justify wrong name Ambavade in wikipedia. There is no relation of Dr.B.R. Ambedkar with Ambavade. You want to mislead the people and his devotees. Kailash70 (talk) 18:43, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

@Kailash70: Huh? I'm not trying to mislead anyone! Remember, content should be verifiable from other reliable sites with references, not "truths" without references. Please see Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth policy. Stylez995 (talk) 18:49, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

@Stylez995 (talk)[User:Stylez995|Stylez995]

You will not agree and I will not satisfy you. Mumbai University has started degree college at Ambadave village to remember Dr. B.R. Ambedkar's contribution. I give you four links as reference for Ambadave as follow

http://www.punjabcolleges.com/MH/Degree/Mandangad/Adarsh-Ambadave-72759/ https://books.google.co.in/books?id=9o3rZNud9oIC&pg=PA9&lpg=PA9&dq=ambadave&source=bl&ots=1Ph0JLRYde&sig=RHYAFEhGqrdP8BGxdw02g4R2qqI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiEgq2g25TQAhVJPY8KHeahBwI4ChDoAQgcMAE#v=onepage&q=ambadave&f=false

http://support.saanjhi.in/support/solutions/articles/6000092025-report-on-field-visit-by-sagy-team-to-ambadave-village-ratnagiri-district-maharashtra https://books.google.co.in/books?id=AbDh3FD1D2kC&pg=PA241&lpg=PA241&dq=ambadave&source=bl&ots=2zLLfOIJ8h&sig=PSFz-OOOzVQJjIV-rfOeua8ECN8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjLoqTp6JTQAhULqo8KHepdDFw4HhDoAQgeMAE#v=onepage&q=ambadave&f=false


Even after you still not satisfy with Ambadave village, I cannot satisfy you what you think on Ambadave. Whatever you like you do that. Kailash70 (talk) 19:06, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

@Stylez995

For Your informaiton at google map- in Mandangad talika, there is "Ambadawe" Kailash70 (talk) 19:20, 6 November 2016 (UTC)


@Stylez995

Do you know meaning of research? In simple term, it is defined as new invention or research findings. Researchers always bring new ideas, theories, etc. based on assumptions or facts. You said "content should be verifiable from other reliable sites with references, not "truths" without references. Please see Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth policy" . If this is the policy of wikipedia, it does mean that we will suggest our students not to refer wikipedia because sometimes, your sources and contents are not reliable. Go ahead..! I have given many link to you above, but still you do not want agree with me. We know that we cannot allow people like you to mislead followers of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedakar on Ambadave/Ambadawe. We will give right information at appropriate places to give correct information to followers. Kailash70 (talk) 07:15, 7 November 2016 (UTC) Hello @Stylez995 I want to give google link as

https://www.google.co.in/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=Ambadawe

Kailash70 (talk) 07:18, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi Stylez995. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

  • 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.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/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! Beeblebrox (talk) 23:23, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Stylez995. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

NPP

ReBanaantjus. G1 was more appropriate. You can't tag a string of very poorly written Dutch filthy porm as A7. Please review the instructions before patrolling any more pages. Thanks.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:18, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

@Kudpung: Oh, I see "It does not cover poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, implausible theories, vandalism or hoaxes, fictional material, coherent non-English material, or poorly translated material." on G1 at WP:CSD page. Thank you for your advice. --Stylez995 (talk) 11:38, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
It doesn't, because the actual most appropriate approach is to quickly run that foreign language (if you can't read Dutch) through Google and then tag such drivel as obvious vandalism - WP:G3. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:54, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

  1. Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
  2. Editor-focused central editing dashboard
  3. "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
  4. Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
  5. Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:09, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

December 2016

Information icon Hello Stylez995. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that there is consensus that we shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1) and/or content (CSD A3) moments after they are created. It is also suggested that pages that might meet CSD A7 criteria not be tagged for deletion immediately after they are created. It's usually best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course still be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I've been doing 15:58, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

@KGirlTrucker81: Hmm... I think "the first few minutes" in WP:CSD page is around minimum 5 minutes. I should now wait longer before adding specific speedy tags. Thanks! :) --Stylez995 (talk) 16:08, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Maintenance tags

Hi, in relation to this: just FYI, removing tags is not against any policy, and you won't find a consensus to write it into policy so please don't template people with "you will be blocked" warnings for doing so. Only deletion tags are specifically protected by policy. Also your tone comes across as extremely aggressive for what is a very minor issue. Please try and maintain a sense of perspective going forward. Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:31, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

@HJ Mitchell: Yes..., but as the user removed {{copyvio}} tag from that page with possible copyright violation, as the Wikipedia:Vandalism#Types of vandalism states on "Avoidant vandalism", it also mentioned Copyvio tag as well, as the user repeatedly removed the tag from that page in attempt to avoid possible deletion of the page he created. He was blocked once possibly for removing that tag. That's weird that i think removal of maintenance tag from articles may count as vandalism, but thanks for giving me the information that only deletion tags is only possible to be blocked for (persistent) removal.--Stylez995 (talk) 13:34, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Al-Masry SC

An article that you have been involved in editing—Al-Masry SC —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Boopitydoopityboop (talk) 03:56, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Changes on Elliott Poe's Biography

Hi Stylez995,

Sorry if I did not left a description of the changes. But as you probably had noticed, I did not remove content. All I did was to add description tags, and highlight keywords to make the article relevant.

The changes I made are still there.

If any other concern regarding the editing of such article; please let me know.

Thanks,

Guillermina — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gmanon (talk • contribs) 13:46, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

@Gmanon: You're welcome. And welcome to Wikipedia as new user.
PS: please sign your comments on talk pages next time by either adding four tides like this: ~~~~ at the end of your comments, or simply clicking on sign icon on the toolbar while editing. The bot has signed your comment for you (as preceding unsigned comment). Thanks! --Stylez995 (talk) 13:58, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

revision of edit

[winstonview] I am writing out of courtesy to explain why I have undone your edit. As a new editor did not understand the 3RR rule so for the first time was blocked last night. I note you removed my edit as you believed I was blocked and therefore ought not to edit.

I have therefore reinstated my edit and hope that it does not cause you any offence. (Winstonview (talk) 22:02, 14 March 2017 (UTC))

@Winstonview: Can you read what the editor User:ScrapIronIV said on his edit summary on this edit? You've restored your edit without adding source and ignored what he said that you shouldn't do so without adding it. Reference is important on Wikipedia to verify that the information is correct. See WP:REFERENCES for more information. If you get reverted again, do not attempt to revert again without adding source, or you would be reported to WP:ANI again and this page would be fully protected or extended-protected, and you could result in addition on extended block, get topic or page banned one you're unblocked again, meaning you're not allowed to edit pages under topic or pages you're banned from.
Instead of reverting, discuss instead about the on his user talk page or see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. --Stylez995 (talk) 08:02, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

[winstonview] I put a reference on originally, but that was removed. I understand I can not use a commercial link, so how do you reference without using a link? (Winstonview (talk) 09:17, 15 March 2017 (UTC))

@Winstonview: You use a reliable independent source. If you can't find any, it a pretty sure indication you should not be adding it (let alone repeatedly). Kleuske (talk) 10:20, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Also since you've been reverted by no fewer than 5 editors now it says that something about your edit is not right. After you're reverted once it's time to take it to the talk page. So the best place for this discussion is the talk page of the article in question rather than user's talk pages, that way everyone interested in the article can engage in the conversation. See Talk:Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority. Canterbury Tail talk 11:52, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the Scottevest edit

If you look at Talk:Scottevest, you'll see that there's an ongoing problem with this article and Scott Jordan's haters who seem desperate (and persistent, albeit with several months to a year between their activity) to add negativity to the article. I'm glad that someone else reverted the latest one because it saves me from looking like the sole protector. Mabalu (talk) 18:59, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

@Mabalu: Agree. The content that I've removed doesn't have any source, and if the information was a hoax, this can harm their reputation. --Stylez995 (talk) 19:07, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

NowThis News

Hi. You asked me via email to redact an edit on this article by another user, but we don't generally redact edits such as "Ritchie333 is a complete pillock who should be desysopped", but ignore them. It's only content that is legally problematic that is considered. As the other party has been blocked, I think the issue is probably now stale.

Also, email is only advisable when you need to discuss things privately, which I don't think this is - I don't check email as often as messages on here in any case. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:56, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

OK, thank's for your information. :) --Stylez995 (talk) 13:33, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

April 2017

Don Rickles - you didn't give me the chance to finish editing it dude — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.159.162.143 (talk) 18:09, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Due to strict policy on Biographies of living people you MUST add reliable source about his death. Persistent unsourced addition about his death may result in block. --Stylez995 (talk) 18:13, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Knaptonium

It's probably a group of kids in a school in New Zealand who are trying out hoaxes on us. I've hard-blocked the IP that complained so that should shut down any other accounts for the rest of the day. Acroterion (talk) 12:03, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

@Acroterion: Good! I don't want them to sink our time by tagging these articles for speedy and reporting them to SPI if this IP is not hard-blocked, and they fill up new pages feed full of "Treeusalem" hoaxes by these possible socks they may have created afterwards. :) --Stylez995 (talk) 12:14, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Martin Scorsese filmography

If I'm not mistaken (I forgot to look before I edited and the log page isn't too helpful), you approved this pending edit. While it seems harmless, that's actually behavior perpetrated by a long-time abuser who is absolutely obsessed with inserting that stuff and, when the impossibly patient User:TheOldJacobite inevitably reverts them with a considered explanation, the person just fights it out in the hopes that they won't be recognized or just switches identities to try again. If you need a reference, User:AndrewOne did a ton of legwork for an ANI report here. I've been kind of winging it, reverting them on sight with "long term abuser" or something like that in my summary while leaving first-and-only vandalism warnings at their talk page. CityOfSilver 22:17, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the nod, COS. Yes, everything he's said here is true. A cursory glance at the edit history of a dozen Scorsese-related film articles (and other film articles, as well) will show that this user repeatedly pushes a "Scorsese is the best" POV with barely-adequate references. He does not respond to talk messages, is abusive to other editors, and simply evades blocks by changing IPs. A long-term abuse report is overdue. Cheers! ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 22:50, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your attention about this suspected LTA. Not all can notice harmless edits that are actually made by LTA abusers. :/ --Stylez995 (talk) 07:58, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
I think this was the exact same way I learned about this person: I saw an edit from a new IP, I had no reason to decline it because it appeared harmless, and I accepted the change before someone else could righteously blast it. This person is really good at tricking people who haven't encountered them yet. CityOfSilver 04:09, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Reply by Jake the Blue

There are third party sources that show up on my browser and also, Saturnino Guzman Cervera is my great grandfather, I just finished a spanish report on him in my spanish class, so then i thought that i would give the US or wherever Wikipedia can be viewed in the world some more information about my great grandfather who is famous for revolutionizing medicine in Yucatan, Mexico.

Here is the best source that i found so far: http://www.meridadeyucatan.com/historia-de-la-medicina-en-yucatan-los-padres-de-la-medicina-moderna-en-yucatan/

By the way i am sorry about calling the Moderators stupid. Also I did not know your were an admin. Im so sorry — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jake the Blue (talk • contribs) 19:49, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Conversation

They were never even close to thrash metal. MetalMartyr (talk) 15:47, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

@MetalMartyr: On your edit summary where you removed the genre, you removed the source as well even you said that the genre was unsourced. Please use more accurate edit summary and not misleading one. As when i tried to access the source, the source was dead (404). So i had to find another source on Google Search. And what I found regarding to the genre is this. I will update the source to the working one like this. --Stylez995 (talk) 16:08, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Mthandeni Gasa

Hello Stylez995, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Mthandeni Gasa, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. - MrX 13:51, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

@MrX:OK. But the text says that she's "born in 8th september 2017", so that looks like that editor made a hoax there because is obviously false that the article is written in past tense. Also it's username is similar to the title of the article. Maybe G3 is an acceptable criteria for speedy on that page? --Stylez995 (talk) 13:56, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Right, but a hoax is not advertising. Hoaxes are covered under WP:CSD#G3. It's possible the date was a typo. Also, you may have been a bit hasty marking the article for deletion only two minutes after its creation. Generally, it is advisable to wait 10-15 minutes, except in very unambiguous cases.- MrX 14:05, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
@MrX: Thanks. I know that unambiguous advertising is covered under G11, while hoaxes (including pure vandalism) is for obviously fake information that is covered under G3 (G10 for BLPs that is meant to harm their reputation). Based on author's username (User:MthaGasa), I think this may be intentional, or simply making edit test on Wikipedia, but otherwise, maybe typo. As she's not notable person, A7 is good for that page, and it was already tagged with this. --Stylez995 (talk) 14:18, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Maybe she is getting an early start on her autobigraphy in celebration of her upcoming birth. - MrX 14:29, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Stylez995/Archive_1&oldid=1142796810"