Jump to content

User talk:A. B.: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Re. WP:BITE: appreciation
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit iOS app edit
Line 153: Line 153:


Again, it really would be a shame if these editors are so discouraged as to not return. But I‘m not sure how I should have handled this better without overstretching AGF beyond reasonability. I‘m open to the idea that I may have messed up; if I have, please tell me what I should have done differently. I appreciate your time with this, thanks for taking a look! :)[[User:Actualcpscm|Actualcpscm]] ([[User talk:Actualcpscm|talk]]) 12:06, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Again, it really would be a shame if these editors are so discouraged as to not return. But I‘m not sure how I should have handled this better without overstretching AGF beyond reasonability. I‘m open to the idea that I may have messed up; if I have, please tell me what I should have done differently. I appreciate your time with this, thanks for taking a look! :)[[User:Actualcpscm|Actualcpscm]] ([[User talk:Actualcpscm|talk]]) 12:06, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

:Well, now we have a double [[WP:BITE|BITE]] problem, which is that <u>I</u> was on a real warpath when I left those messages. I realized this several hours later. ''So please accept <u>my</u> apologies.''
:In the meantime, I'll think about your question.
:Thanks for reaching out and thanks for caring!
:—13:54, 2 August 2023 (UTC) <span style="font-family:Futura">[[User:A. B.|A. B.]] <sup>([[User talk:A. B.|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/A. B.|contribs]] • [[Special:CentralAuth/A._B.|global count]])</sup></span> 13:54, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:54, 2 August 2023


Hi. Just to let you know, that this article has been nominated for deletion. -Mardus /talk 02:10, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I think this AfD is a mistake. —A. B. (talkcontribsglobal count) 12:50, 23 May 2023 (UTC) A. B. (talkcontribsglobal count) 12:50, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back! If you haven't seen already: m:Wikiproject:Antispam is a cross-wiki anti-spam project. It focuses on undisclosed paid-for spam articles but also does cross-wiki spam cleanup. I've been seeing more instances where UPE spammers are also link spammers. MER-C 19:01, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome. It makes me happy to hear from you.
A. B. (talkcontribsglobal count) 19:06, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Scottywong case opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Scottywong. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Scottywong/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 21, 2023, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Scottywong/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, –MJLTalk 19:22, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AN

Second sentence is why I'm not sure your search comes up correctly (on system end, not yours). Just didn't find that appropriate for the eyes of the Board. Star Mississippi 01:33, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Little oops

I saw your edit to Jack4576's talk page. Twinkle1990 identifies as she/her (per her WP prefs visible on mouseover popup). Just fyi. Schazjmd (talk) 18:03, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oops indeed!
Thanks for letting me know.
--A. B. (talkcontribsglobal count) 19:31, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AlisonW case request accepted

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 30, 2023, which is when the evidence phase closes. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 23:51, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all you do

The Barnstar of Diplomacy
I just saw how you stood by me to ensure that the pages I created on Nigerian topics don’t get deleted. You’re appreciated. Amaekuma (talk) 09:18, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much! I'm honored. A. B. (talkcontribsglobal count) 13:19, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed decision posted for the AlisonW case

The proposed decision for the AlisonW case has been posted. Statements regarding the proposed decision are welcome at the talk page. Please note that comments must be made in your own section. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 15:24, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The arbitration case Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW has been closed, and the final decision is viewable at the case page. The following remedy has been enacted:

  • For failure to meet the conduct standards expected of an administrator, AlisonW's administrative user rights are removed. She may regain them at any time via a successful request for adminship.

For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 17:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW closed

Books & Bytes – Issue 57

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 57, May – June 2023

  • Suggestion improvements
  • Favorite collections tips
  • Spotlight: Promoting Nigerian Books and Authors

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Economy, trade, and companies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Infobox company on a "Economy, trade, and companies" 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, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
Thank you for addressing an unfounded personal attack, both in the AfD and on the ANI page. You spoke up against injustice and went on and beyond expectations! gidonb (talk) 00:01, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

I am grateful to you for voting to keep Arleen McCarty Hynes. I found her on Women in Red, and have been learning how to write bios by crafting ones from its ranks that fall within my interests. WIR cautions that they won't all necessarily be notable, but I thought she was and I'm honored you stepped in to agree. Fortunaa (talk) 21:41, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Thank you for all of the time you spend checking, rechecking and tracking down references in AFD discussions. You indeed seem tireless! Liz Read! Talk! 02:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I try to think "What would Liz think of this?" --A. B. (talkcontribsglobal count) 03:06, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 August 2023

Hi! I thought that concerns about my behavior (in this case re WP:BITE) are better discussed on a talk page, rather than at an AFD.

First, I‘d like to say that I fundamentally agree that it would be a shame if these editors did not continue to contribute to WP. However, my interactions with them were clearly aimed at helping them navigate the complex policies and guidelines.

My very first interaction (after the automated PROD message) was to offer my help. The subsequent misunderstanding regarding WP:PAID was unfortunate, but I think understandable given the wording of their reply. I apologised and informed them of WP:COI, which clearly applies here.

I then [[offered my help again, and then we had a brief exchange about independence of sources.

I think opening the SPI investigation is clearly explained over there and quite legitimate. While good intentions should be assumed, and I did make that assumption, meatpuppeting is nonetheless inappropriate (and can look very similar to sockpuppeting).

As the PROD was declined and notability issues were not addressed, I think an AFD was quite appropriate.

Again, it really would be a shame if these editors are so discouraged as to not return. But I‘m not sure how I should have handled this better without overstretching AGF beyond reasonability. I‘m open to the idea that I may have messed up; if I have, please tell me what I should have done differently. I appreciate your time with this, thanks for taking a look! :)Actualcpscm (talk) 12:06, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, now we have a double BITE problem, which is that I was on a real warpath when I left those messages. I realized this several hours later. So please accept my apologies.
In the meantime, I'll think about your question.
Thanks for reaching out and thanks for caring!
—13:54, 2 August 2023 (UTC) A. B. (talkcontribsglobal count) 13:54, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]