User talk:CorbieVreccan: Difference between revisions
→Definition of witchcraft: Reply |
|||
| Line 183: | Line 183: | ||
:::Additionally, one of the main people changing it to the Wiccan definition is doing so on multiple related articles, and edit-warring. - [[User:CorbieVreccan|<span style="color: #660099;"><strong>CorbieVreccan</strong></span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:CorbieVreccan|☊]]</sup> [[WP:SPIDER|☼]] 18:08, 12 July 2023 (UTC) |
:::Additionally, one of the main people changing it to the Wiccan definition is doing so on multiple related articles, and edit-warring. - [[User:CorbieVreccan|<span style="color: #660099;"><strong>CorbieVreccan</strong></span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:CorbieVreccan|☊]]</sup> [[WP:SPIDER|☼]] 18:08, 12 July 2023 (UTC) |
||
::::[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Witchcraft&diff=prev&oldid=1165161314 Here's] yet another revert, with the unfounded claim that "everyone agrees" the Wiccan meaning "is the modern definition". They keep putting the Wiccan meaning on top, despite all the academic sources saying the traditional meaning is the most common, and despite the vast majority of the article being about that. So I've posted on [[WP:RFPP]]. I don't often make those requests so hopefully I've written it properly. – [[User:Asarlaí|<span style="color:darkblue">Asarlaí</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Asarlaí|talk]])</sup> 12:59, 13 July 2023 (UTC) |
::::[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Witchcraft&diff=prev&oldid=1165161314 Here's] yet another revert, with the unfounded claim that "everyone agrees" the Wiccan meaning "is the modern definition". They keep putting the Wiccan meaning on top, despite all the academic sources saying the traditional meaning is the most common, and despite the vast majority of the article being about that. So I've posted on [[WP:RFPP]]. I don't often make those requests so hopefully I've written it properly. – [[User:Asarlaí|<span style="color:darkblue">Asarlaí</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Asarlaí|talk]])</sup> 12:59, 13 July 2023 (UTC) |
||
:::::Unfortunately, I can see why this just looks like a content dispute to those who aren't willing to dive in and look at the poor sourcing, read the whole article, or who are unfamiliar with the field. I work at RFPP fairly often and it can be difficult. On the other hand, things do seem to be sorting out. The latest compromise, and your edits may have resolved it. Darker Dreams may be the main problem, as they seem to be on a site-wide POV push. But if the other editors have now read the sources and realized what is behind the misinformation, this may resolve with an accurate article. Can you enable email on your page, or email me? - [[User:CorbieVreccan|<span style="color: #660099;"><strong>CorbieVreccan</strong></span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:CorbieVreccan|☊]]</sup> [[WP:SPIDER|☼]] 18:35, 13 July 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Feedback request: Religion and philosophy request for comment == |
== Feedback request: Religion and philosophy request for comment == |
||
Revision as of 18:35, 13 July 2023
| This is CorbieVreccan's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
|
 | This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated. |
 |
The Drama Llama is Watching You |
| The owner of this page reserves the right to delete trolling and drama at their discretion. |
| No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful) |
Women and Wikipedia: the world is watching.
 | This editor is a Senior Editor and is entitled to display this Rhodium Editor Star. |
 |
|---|
| 4 July 2024 |
If you are new here, and feeling angry, please read Tips for the Angry New User before explaining to us how terribly wrong and messed up Wikipedia is. Would you believe, we probably already know? You can also familiarise yourself with Wikipedia culture via these ^^^ policy links and helpful essays.
If you've been an admin for a while, and are feeling burnt out, take a step back and take some deep breaths, and don't forget to WP:CHILL
|
The Barnstar of Diligence |
| Thank you for all the hard work you put in toward Indigenous content on Wikipedia. Yuchitown (talk) 00:52, 18 November 2022 (UTC) |
empathy
Thank you for quality articles about Indigenous women such as Theresa Spence, for service over 15 years including admin service, for empathy in article changes and exquisite edit summaries, for "I'm putting the women first here. Just because." - You are recipient no. 2832 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:48, 12 March 2023 (UTC) you are an awesome Wikipedian!
What's goin' on...
January 2020 at Women in Red
|
BS
Hi, CV! I wanted to drop you a word of thanks for your work towards getting the Stratford thing under control. Which clearly it isn't yet, but I suppose sooner or later a check-user will get to the SPI, and I'm moderately hopeful that that will lead somewhere. If it doesn't I'll take this to ANI, enough's enough! Thanks for your emails, read and acknowledged, but I don't think a lot's going to be gained by going down that particular rabbit hole. It seems to me that there's a LOT of clean-up needed – crappy articles like Stratford Lyon and Stamford Bull Run for starters. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:41, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
- I somehow missed the earlier debacle, but I've seen cases like this before. I'm sorry you went through so much frustration over it. That was not fair, to you, to everyone who worked the case, or to the community. Hopefully we'll get it sorted this time around. Could definitely use more eyes and hands on cleaning up the astroturfing in the wake of this. Best, - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 19:52, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red May 2023
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 18:27, 27 April 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Administrators' newsletter – May 2023
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.
Technical news
- Progress has started on the Page Triage improvement project. This is to address the concerns raised by the community in their 2022 WMF letter that requested improvements be made to the tool.
Arbitration
- The proposed decision in the World War II and the history of Jews in Poland case is expected 11 May 2023.
Miscellaneous
- The Wikimedia Foundation annual plan 2023-2024 draft is open for comment and input through May 19. The final plan will be published in July 2023.
Mohammad Sadegh Amiri
Hello, can you remove the tag of Mohammad Sadegh Amiri, thank you 113.203.74.170 (talk) 21:27, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
- I am not sure what you are asking, or why you are asking me. Do you mean the notice that Mohammad Sadegh Amiri is currently being considered for deletion? If you want to discuss that, you will need to go to the deletion discussion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mohammad Sadegh Amiri. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 21:31, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
- Yes 113.203.83.158 (talk) 02:16, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
- Please remove the label 113.203.21.146 (talk) 04:55, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
- If you read the template it says: "do not remove this notice before the discussion is closed". This applies to admins as well as all other editors. I am also unclear why you are writing me about this. I've never edited that article. Assuming you do not have Conflict of Interest, or some other reason you can't edit or participate, participate in the linked discussion and/or improve the article if you want the article preserved. Best wishes, - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 18:18, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
Definition of witchcraft
Saying we are harmful isn’t ok. We are healers. Please don’t attack my religion. Fix it promptly, as it is hate speech. And no, Wicca and witchcraft are not synonymous. Not all witches are Wiccan (I’m not). It’s like saying all Christian people are Catholic. Please, fix this now. 68.229.102.219 (talk) 23:58, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
- Discussion for improvement of the article is better on article talk, so all the involved editors can participate. None of the content in the article is my opinion. It's based on the solid sources, and a worldwide view, not just recent, western beliefs (post Gerald Gardner) that have redefined the word in a few cultures. Traditional cultures see it very differently, and we need to represent a worldwide view. The other views are thoroughly covered as well. Read the article and the links. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 18:50, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
- This is getting out of hand. They're now ignoring guidelines and re-writing the lead willy-nilly while discussion is ongoing. They've put the Wiccan definition on top (so the lead no longer matches the body), are using dictionaries as sources (without proper formatting), and are deleting parts of the lead that they don't like. There have been several reverts today. I think the article should be restored to the last stable version and given greater protection or even locked until this issue is dealt with. It's protection is due to run out soon, and it will be getting a lot of traffic tomorrow as Margaret Murray will be the featured article. – Asarlaí (talk) 00:16, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
- As CorbieVreccan wrote above:
Discussion for improvement of the article is better on article talk
. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 15:53, 12 July 2023 (UTC) - As I've edited the content, I can't be the one to protect it. I suggest posting exactly the above at WP:RFPP. If you don't get to it I can do so later on. I agree, it's completely out of hand. Even on talk, I'm getting responses that indicate some users aren't even reading the discussion but responding to things they think others are saying, but really aren't happening at all. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 18:06, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
- Additionally, one of the main people changing it to the Wiccan definition is doing so on multiple related articles, and edit-warring. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 18:08, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
- Here's yet another revert, with the unfounded claim that "everyone agrees" the Wiccan meaning "is the modern definition". They keep putting the Wiccan meaning on top, despite all the academic sources saying the traditional meaning is the most common, and despite the vast majority of the article being about that. So I've posted on WP:RFPP. I don't often make those requests so hopefully I've written it properly. – Asarlaí (talk) 12:59, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, I can see why this just looks like a content dispute to those who aren't willing to dive in and look at the poor sourcing, read the whole article, or who are unfamiliar with the field. I work at RFPP fairly often and it can be difficult. On the other hand, things do seem to be sorting out. The latest compromise, and your edits may have resolved it. Darker Dreams may be the main problem, as they seem to be on a site-wide POV push. But if the other editors have now read the sources and realized what is behind the misinformation, this may resolve with an accurate article. Can you enable email on your page, or email me? - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 18:35, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
- Here's yet another revert, with the unfounded claim that "everyone agrees" the Wiccan meaning "is the modern definition". They keep putting the Wiccan meaning on top, despite all the academic sources saying the traditional meaning is the most common, and despite the vast majority of the article being about that. So I've posted on WP:RFPP. I don't often make those requests so hopefully I've written it properly. – Asarlaí (talk) 12:59, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
- As CorbieVreccan wrote above:
- This is getting out of hand. They're now ignoring guidelines and re-writing the lead willy-nilly while discussion is ongoing. They've put the Wiccan definition on top (so the lead no longer matches the body), are using dictionaries as sources (without proper formatting), and are deleting parts of the lead that they don't like. There have been several reverts today. I think the article should be restored to the last stable version and given greater protection or even locked until this issue is dealt with. It's protection is due to run out soon, and it will be getting a lot of traffic tomorrow as Margaret Murray will be the featured article. – Asarlaí (talk) 00:16, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Religion and philosophy request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Scientific racism on a "Religion and philosophy" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
Countering systemic bias
Is a member of WikiProject Countering systemic bias using tangential sources to cast doubt on the veracity of a living purported statutory rape victim[1][2][3][4][5][6][7] in favor of her alleged dead wealthy white male rapist? That doesn't sound right, Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:29, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
- Please read up on the cases thoroughly. Notably, all the many sources that document Mattix/Maddox/Lightning's life in that era. There are numerous contemporaries who were already on record about their lives, including Mattix with her contradictory versions told over the years. "Believe Survivors" means give everyone a serious listen and consideration - no matter who they are, no matter what you think of them as a person. Evaluate all the evidence and testimony with open eyes and compassion.
- False accusations of rape are more unusual than false charges of carjacking. Most women, and many men, will be raped in their lifetimes, and it is hell to get charges to stick through the courts. I know all of this. All too well. But... I also know these cases and the two instances are very rare and unusual situations. Truth is not dependent on race, class, age, or gender. It's not dependent on liking or disliking an artist's work. It is very sad when someone confabulates or lies, as it wreaks havoc on the lives of all survivors. It's a horrible thing. Not as horrible as being raped, but horrible.
- Please look seriously at the timeline and read the witness statements as well as the conflicting accounts she gave. There are other accounts out there, as well, that aren't included in the article. Don't turn this into a personal attack because you haven't done the research, OK? - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 23:47, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
- Unless I'm mistaken we don't have any sources which say these the accusations of rape were false. We don't appear to have any sources which call the allegations confabulations or lies. Where you getting this from? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:54, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
- The sources say Mattix was in a sexual relationship with Jimmy Page for two years before she later claimed Bowie "took her virginity". Sable Starr, the woman she told people she was with on that night, claiming she had a threesome with along with Bowie, says Mattix was not there. If you were reading the material you just tried to blank from the article you would know this. There's more, but you're not reading. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 23:58, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
- We aren't allowed to do original research, especially about living people. Now show me the reliable source which explicitly supports the claim about a living person you just made. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 00:01, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- I've already pointed you at the sources, which you are clearly not reading. Stop wasting people's time and do the work. Stop posting here. Keep discussion about improving the article on article talk. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 00:09, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- We aren't allowed to do original research, especially about living people. Now show me the reliable source which explicitly supports the claim about a living person you just made. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 00:01, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- The sources say Mattix was in a sexual relationship with Jimmy Page for two years before she later claimed Bowie "took her virginity". Sable Starr, the woman she told people she was with on that night, claiming she had a threesome with along with Bowie, says Mattix was not there. If you were reading the material you just tried to blank from the article you would know this. There's more, but you're not reading. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 23:58, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
- Unless I'm mistaken we don't have any sources which say these the accusations of rape were false. We don't appear to have any sources which call the allegations confabulations or lies. Where you getting this from? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:54, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
Actually, if you want to defend Lori's honour, take it to Jimmy Page, where they have her listed as older than she was, and simply describe it as a "relationship". - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 00:12, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- There's also another underlying problem here this user isn't understanding when it comes to Bowie. Claims. Everything Lori Mattix has said in relation to Bowie has counteracted documented evidence of where he was, what he was doing, and who he was with, by biographers, individuals he was with at that time, and even Mattix herself. It's very different from like you say Jimmy Page, where their relationship was very documented and most importantly, the one in question is still alive to confirm it. Mattix made all the claims after Bowie died; where were the accusations when he was alive? Since Bowie is no longer living, anything said would just be defaming a dead artist. – zmbro (talk) (cont) 00:50, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- What gets me is that user's laser focus on Bowie, and their abject refusal to be clear-eyed in evaluating the evidence. It's a blatant POV push that they seem to have come here to do. If they want to write about men we know were sexually abusing and exploiting these underage girls, cases where there is zero doubt, why are they not doing that? They could do real research in the RS sources, go through these girls' lists, testimonies and photos, and get on it.
- I have a great deal of compassion for the girls who got caught up in the whole "baby groupie" thing. I understand Mattix's dilemma around saying these relationships were her choice, and consensual; her wanting to think of herself as a young woman with agency, despite the fact that she was underage. I also think that it's thoroughly documented that she was a kid on drugs and these men exploited her. But... there is considerable documentation that she also liked to tell tall tales and that Bowie was not one of these men.
- This obsessed user made a personal attack ludicrously claiming I don't believe women... um, yeah, I do. I believe Sable Starr who Mattix says was in bed with them, but Starr says Mattix was not there. I believe Pamela Des Barres who documented Mattix's prior relationship with Jimmy Page (as have so many others). I believe the literally hundreds of actual survivors I know. And I believe Mattix - in that she's told so many conflicting versions of this that she herself is the one that has proven she's an unreliable witness. That's why it's so painful and disturbing to have to deal with one of the very rare cases of falsehood in this area. It really, really sucks. As I said above, this stuff is so harmful to real survivors. I take this seriously precisely because it is so important. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 22:07, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Hermit on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:32, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
Bowie
Hey. If the Bowie article winds up at FAR at some point after this is all over, and if you think I'll be helpful feel free to give me a ping. :) Sideswipe9th (talk) 00:19, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
- Same here. I really haven't worked on it much. Just bits here and there when I've seen some obvious problems. Good work stepping up on the WP:ICANTHEARYOU user ignoring the sources. Let me know if you need help with that, as well. My email is also open. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 18:52, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Libreboot on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red - June 2023
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 09:15, 28 May 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Replies
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You have a new message at Talk:Hank Williams First Nation's talk page. — MY, OH, MY! (mushy yank) — 20:16, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
Tokata Iron Eyes identifies as nonbinary. Please don't use any gendered terms like "her" and "daughter" like you did here [8]. Roman Reigns Fanboy (talk) 05:29, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
- Read the article and sources, including Tokata's instagram, where she uses the fem. construction of her Lakota name and the pronouns are she/they. I used what is standard in the article, and what Tokata has expressed a preference for. It's unclear whether Tokata currently identifies as nonbinary as that statement came from her father and is not recent. She's changed some things on her profile and in her life since then.
Iron Eyes uses she/they pronouns.[1]
- CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 08:23, 7 June 2023 (UTC) (forgot to sign on 2 June)
References
- She/they is used by nonbinary people and transfeminine people [9]. And the Independent article says "Tokata now identifies as non-binary and calls themselves Gibson. They said recently that Miller has provided “loving support and invaluable protection” as she has been grieving the loss of a close friend." [10] Roman Reigns Fanboy (talk) 03:46, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, I am aware of how pronouns work :) This really goes on the article talk pages, as it's not up to me, but is a matter for consensus. I am following the consensus in my edits and I hope you do the same. That source is from a year ago, btw. We're going with what is current, per MOS:GENDERID. Look at the article history. Someone just removed the bit about how "Gibson" was on Iron Eyes' profile last summer, briefly. We discussed this at article talk. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 08:23, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2023
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2023).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, editors indefinitely site-banned by community consensus will now have all rights, including sysop, removed.
- As a part of the Wikimedia Foundation's IP Masking project, a new policy has been created that governs the access to temporary account IP addresses. An associated FAQ has been created and individual communities can increase the requirements to view temporary account IP addresses.
Technical news
- Bot operators and tool maintainers should schedule time in the coming months to test and update their tools for the effects of IP masking. IP masking will not be deployed to any content wiki until at least October 2023 and is unlikely to be deployed to the English Wikipedia until some time in 2024.
Arbitration
- The arbitration case World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been closed. The topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland is subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction.
Miscellaneous
- Following a community referendum, the arbitration policy has been modified to remove the ability for users to appeal remedies to Jimbo Wales.
Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Boulton and Park on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:31, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
Article images
Hi, I saw your comment under the history tab on the Anansi page. Are fashion editorials not acceptable as article images? MiddleOfAfrica (talk) 18:58, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you mean by "fashion editorials". Have you used the image anywhere else? Reverse Image search results only turned up other images of what look to be the same or similar jacket, but not the person wearing it or the composition as a whole. I mentioned it because of Gnorung's comment about it possibly being AI. I have no problem with using a modern image for the article, as long as it's your own work and it conveys the essence of the subject. As to their other concerns... Maybe ask them? - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 19:37, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- Fashion editorials are just photos taken that focus on fashion and a theme. I haven't used this image anywhere else though. But I do have an illustration that does convey Anansi better. I just thought that was more interesting. If this image is causing some concern, I'll try the other. MiddleOfAfrica (talk) 20:24, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- I have no problem with the image, and that account has only done one edit. But if you think the other one is better, sure, let's see it and we can all pick. Best wishes, - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 20:26, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- Sounds good and thanks. Ciao MiddleOfAfrica (talk) 20:47, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- I have no problem with the image, and that account has only done one edit. But if you think the other one is better, sure, let's see it and we can all pick. Best wishes, - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 20:26, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- Fashion editorials are just photos taken that focus on fashion and a theme. I haven't used this image anywhere else though. But I do have an illustration that does convey Anansi better. I just thought that was more interesting. If this image is causing some concern, I'll try the other. MiddleOfAfrica (talk) 20:24, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red July 2023
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:42, 27 June 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Administrators' newsletter – July 2023
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).
Administrator changes
Bureaucrat changes
Guideline and policy news
- Contributions to the English Wikipedia are now released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0) license instead of CC BY-SA 3.0. Contributions are still also released under the GFDL license.
Technical news
- Discussion is open regarding a proposed global policy regarding third-party resources. Third-party resources are computer resources that reside outside of Wikimedia production websites.
Arbitration
- Two arbitration cases are currently open. Proposed decisions are expected 5 July 2023 for the Scottywong case and 9 July 2023 for the AlisonW case.
You've got mail
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Netherzone (talk) 22:52, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Vox (political party) on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Religion and philosophy request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Acts of Peter and the Twelve on a "Religion and philosophy" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:31, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
Protecion of page Drag Race Philippines (season 2)
Hi I would need your help regarding the semi-protection of the page in project since, despite we agreed in the Talk page with rules that follow the platform and affect the WP:Crystal, an anonymous IP continues to edit the page, causing editwar, despite the warning from potential vandalism nor without respecting the rules that have been jointly established. It would be a great help if you could ascertain the protection of the page already made in the appropriate page report. Thank you in advance :) Dominikcapuan (talk) 21:32, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, I have to agree with the other admins that this looks like a content dispute between you and 2.24.250.74 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), who is partially-blocked from several articles, but not Drag Race Philippines (season 2). I've looked at the content the two of you are going back and forth over and I have to admit I'm not clear on which content belongs. Both of you are edit-warring, which I know is frustrating when an IP does this, but it's not clear that either of you are doing the right thing here. I suggest you let it go for now. If this has introduced inaccuracies to the article, flag the article and seek other input on talk. I'm sorry I can't be of more help at this juncture. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 18:22, 13 July 2023 (UTC)