User talk:Wesley Wolf

Wesley

Talk

Awards

WikiLove

Contributions

Sandbox

Commons

Email

Time

Sadly I have not been able to edit as actively as I would have liked to, due to a busier real-life schedule. Fulltime employment as a Keyworker for a British supermarket chain, has meant it difficult to find spare time to edit and maintain articles during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. However, I have not gone into retirement just yet. I have granted Alucard 16 permission to be a guardian of my talk page during my indefinite periods of absence.

Protected

@MelanieN: Here we go. I knew I would be attacked by this arsehole. Wes Wolf ^Talk 02:20, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Protected. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:22, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks NeilN. I would like to say I'm psychic to know they would attack here next. But I think anyone would have seen that coming lol. Wes Wolf ^Talk 02:24, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

...which I (edit conflict)ed on. I defer to NeilN's longer one:) DMacks (talk) 02:25, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. This LTA is rather tenacious. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:27, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

With how fast this dude is switching IP accounts, no wonder he calls himself "Nate Speed". Although he might have met his match with me, seeing as I'm the "Wolf" that bites - . Wes Wolf ^Talk 02:29, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Flame Is Burning

Hi Wesley Wolf. Just letting you know, I've moved Flame Is Burning back after you moved it last month, as there is nothing I can see written at WP:TITLEFORMAT about not capitalising the first letter of words like "Is". I don't see why there would be anything about that written there anyway, as that section does not concern what letters to capitalise and what to not, and that would contradict MOS:CT, which concerns what letters are capitalised in English language titles on Wikipedia. MOS:CT says: "The following words should be capitalized in English-language titles: [...] Every verb, including forms of to be (Be, Am, Is, Are, Was, Were, Been)". (Also, just letting you know, no need to ping me, I watchlist talk pages I post on.) Ss112 10:50, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for informing me of this and providing the helpful hints too. Wes Wolf ^Talk 12:02, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Please check my source before calling me lier

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

you locked my topic on the junior eurovision 2017 talk page without even checking my source. please check my source.84.212.111.156 (talk) 16:49, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

I've checked the source you provided here, and I'm not certain what point you are trying to make. There is no mention of the Junior Eurovision Song Contest anywhere. Perhaps you would like to clearly and explicitly state what exactly this has to do with Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2017. — Tuxipεdia^(talk) 20:37, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

It would probably help if the IP could spell. Lier? Do you not mean "liar"? And I merely pointed a truthful fact. I joined Wikipedia in 2011, and every year without fail you have posted the same old story that Norway is going to pull out of Eurovision, or they will pull out of Junior Eurovision. Firstly, they are not taking part in Junior Eurovision, so cannot exactly "pull-out" of a contest which they do not participate in. Secondly, it is a proven fact that Norway do not intend to return to JESC, as they are concentrating more on the Nordic version. That is what this source is referencing. P.S. I have not locked anything. The discussion thread is merely archived. Any subsequent comments can still be made underneath the {{Archive bottom}} section once you have clicked "edit". Wes Wolf ^Talk 05:37, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Vandalism: Spokesperson of Ukraine in Eurovision 2017

It was officially announced that Zlata Ognevich will be the spokesperson of Ukraine in Eurovision 2017: https://vk.com/wall-139245847_1581. Pavlo Shylko is the official speaker of the contest, not the spokesperson of results nor the commentator. Please, check information in the official sources. Don't spread vandalism in Wikipedia. Thank you. ^{talk to me} 13:46, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello @EricLewan: There is a reason your edit was reverted. Having looked at the original source, it appears whoever inserted misunderstood the meaning and didn't realize that Pavlo Shylko was the spokesperson for a team of organisers, not the Ukrainian delegation. Your source translates poorly over Google translate so I can't be one-hundred percent certain that Zlata Ognevich will be the spokesperson. The reason, ultimately, that your edit was reverted was because you didn't use an edit summary and because you removed a citation without immediately providing another. Wesley Wolf cares greatly about the reliability of articles within the WikiProject Eurovision scope, and rightly so due to the high levels of original research they receive, so he was right to place a user warning on your talk page. Accusing him of spreading vandalism, as well as Chris troutman as shown here, is provocative, and I would suggest that if you want other editors to listen to what you have to say, don't go around assuming bad faith and calling people vandals. — Tuxipεdia^(talk) 22:01, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Well to start off with, VK is a social media site, so not exactly 100% reliable. Secondly, EricLewan needs to tone down on his comments and stop accusing me of vandalism. You hardly know me, and if you did, you would know that I hold a strong dislike to vandals. It would be hypocritical of me to hate vandals and then start vandalising myself. The reason I reverted your edit is because you changed details on a living person without A) explaining why in the edit summary, and B) without providing a new and more reliable source. Wikipedia has strict rules when adding content on living people, and you did not follow those rules. As this is not the first time you have made such edits regarding people, then your actions constituted vandalism. Wes Wolf ^Talk 07:11, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Revert on List of Eurovision Song Contest winning songwriters

I apologise, but I didn't quite understand why you reverted my last edit to the article List of Eurovision Song Contest winning songwriters. The automated message you left on my talk page didn't clarify in what way my edit comprised "experimenting with Wikipedia" (which is odd either way, since I've been around for some time; I would hardly call any good faith mistakes "experimenting"). Thanks! -- RickMorais (talk) 04:03, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

@RickMorais: "Since you have been around a long time"? Your 19 December 2011 versus my 13 August 2011. I think I've been around a little bit longer. The revert was because you changed an image for no specific reason. It did not improve anything, and the singer was not even present in your revision. So yes, it did appear to be "experimenting". And if you have been here a long time, as you have expressed, then you would also know the message I left is a standard worded message produced via twinkle. I cannot change the wording on a template that was posted on your talk page. Wes Wolf ^Talk 04:20, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Your point being that you've been around 4 months longer than me? I wasn't trying to "pull rank" or anything, I was just saying it seems off to say someone who's been editing for 6 years is "experimenting" (or in other words, that perhaps you ought not to just have left an automatic message?)

Either way, that's not at all important and I don't want to come off as argumentative. If you'll check my edit again, you'll see that I didn't "change an image for no specific reason" -- I added a picture of this year's winner to the gallery. -- RickMorais (talk) 04:34, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

@RickMorais: If you wasn't trying to pull rank, then why make the remark in the first place? You clearly were trying to pull rank, as you assumed I was a newbie or had been a user for a lesser period than yourself, and are now back-tracking your remark. And to be honest, I was editing as an IP for approximately 2 or 3 months prior to my account creation date, after being invited by a fellow member of WP:ESC to do so. But who joined Wikipedia first is neither here nor there, as it is just a petty battleground cry, and experience is not something to use as a weapon against others. Your revision did not improve much, and the singer was not even present in that image, only his sister. The photo gallery of winners on that article is suppose to use an image that shows the singer only, not their songwriter or other persons accompanying them. So yes, it did appear to be "experimenting" albeit in a minor sense of the word. Wes Wolf ^Talk 04:49, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Need I point out the article is called List of Eurovision Song Contest winning songwriters? -- RickMorais (talk) 04:51, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Don't start getting facetious with me, please. Yes I just noticed seconds before you posted that last comment, that it is the songwriters article. I've been too busy chasing around and cleaning up a trail of vandalism from User:Neverrainy, that I've not even been to sleep yet. I wish that user would just cut some slack and stop vandalising, so that I can get to bed. . Wes Wolf ^Talk 04:54, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Cheers! -- RickMorais (talk) 04:56, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

@RickMorais: Cheers for what? We do need to be careful of WP:NOTGALLERY though, as those sections should not become a catalogue of images. Only more notable and well-known songwriters should only be in there. Wes Wolf ^Talk 04:58, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

• If you wouldn't mind doing a favour so that I can sleep without thinking too much about the destruction User:Neverrainy is causing. Is there any chance you could assist on the watch on the user. I can feel my eyes getting so heavy that I could sleep standing up. Wes Wolf ^Talk 05:02, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

I'll try and help out with the user where I can. Good night Wes. — Tuxipεdia^(talk) 05:29, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Eurovision 2017 tables

Regarding your deletion of the full results in Eurovision 2017. (Reverted to revision 780264159 by ChallengeLover: Please see the edit summary. We do not add both jury and televote columns in this table section. Never have in the past. Stick to presentation style. (TW)) (undo Could you at least add the jury/televote in a "split" fashion, as is in other Eurovision articles, at least? As both the jury and televotes are given in the full, I think it's perfectly valid and interesting to see both numbers in the table, but I see you think otherwise. The "split" votes are usually hidden away in the other articles, so it shouldn't be too disturbing to your field of view. - Jetro (talk) 07:34, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi @Jetro: Because Wes currently is asleep, I presume, I'll provide you with an answer. I'm glad that you show an interest in the contest, but consensus from WikiProject Eurovision is that we do not insert too much information into the tables, as this is mentioned elsewhere, as you will find in the Eurovision Song Contest 2016 article and others like it. We place this information under the scoreboard header in collapsible tables. Nevertheless, if you are interested in Eurovision, perhaps you would like to add your name to the members list. That way, you could acquaint yourself with typical Eurovision editing styles. Consider this an informal invitation. — Tuxipεdia^(talk) 08:59, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your assistance @Tuxipedia:, indeed I was asleep. @Jetro:, if you wish for the style layout to change, then you shouldn't be coming to a user's talk page seeking that to happen - I do not WP:OWN the articles. Eurovision articles come under the scope of WP:ESC, so any changes to format and layout need to be discussed with the project, as the impact would be wider than just one article. Which if you actually had checked the archives, it was noted that having split results in the participation table would be too complicated to the average reader. After all. the final result is the combined total, not the split results. That is why they are shown differently for those who may wish to know that information. We should not be force-feeding data down people's throats. Just like an old proverb - less is more!. Wes Wolf ^Talk 13:44, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Nul points

Hi Wesley, great work on ESC articles. Dont know if you're following the issue of nul points in the infobox but nul points from jury or televote seems notable and worth recording even though as you know nul points overall is extremely unlikely under current system. Infobox entry on this is being blanked regularly, it only affects 2016 and 2017. Any views? Zymurgy (talk) 20:28, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

To editor Zymurgy: I've sub-sectioned this comment, hope you don't mind. In response to the question however, I was under the impression that we were now noting nul points for both jury and televoting since the voting system changed last year. I seem to recall that outcome being reached anyway. Who is it that has forgotten about the new method, do we know? Wes Wolf ^Talk 20:31, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Great thanks Wesley - I'm seeing this here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/009988aaabbbccc, I changed back a number of times with reference in edit summary to the article on the voting system but this was reverted again a few times. You are probably keeping an eye on the 2016 and 2017 articles more often than I am so was interested in your views.Zymurgy (talk) 20:39, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm not 100% certain, but I belive nul points is for countries which received no points from both the jury vote and televote. I hope that clears things up. — Tuxipεdia^(talk) 20:42, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

To editor Zymurgy:, when you say "reverted again a few times", do you mean from the same user? If so, they need to be reporting for edit warring and potentially WP:3RR.

To editor Tuxipedia:, the nul points thing is a weird one. Before the new voting system, yes it would have meant both jury and public vote. But now that both sets are accountable, then both sets of "nul points" need to be noted. Wes Wolf ^Talk 20:50, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Folks - thank you both, as I understand matters because nul points is now virtually impossible (2016 onwards), the nul points section in info box must be for either jury or televote not just both. Otherwise whats the point in having it in the info box. No points from either 41 juries or 41 public votes is notable! Reversions seem to be the same user, 2016 the info is still up, 2017 its currently been changed to none. Zymurgy (talk) 21:03, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

@AxG: Do you think it would be feasible to update the infobox so that it can split nul points for jury, public, and combined votes? To editor Zymurgy: seeing as we are now into the second year of the new system, it might now be worthwhile for the wikiproject to review format and layout styles, to iron out all of these new issues. Wes Wolf ^Talk 21:06, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Great ideas. Thanks WesleyZymurgy (talk) 21:15, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

@Zymurgy: I have reported the user for 3RR (see here). As you have been involved in the incident, it might be worthwhile popping over to the discussion and presenting any evidence you may feel fit, as the admins are likely to check anyone and everyone involved. It just covers your back that's all. Wes Wolf ^Talk 21:17, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Wesley Wolf Trolling. NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:08, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Do you like these any of these (Eurovision) songs that I like?

If so, please tell me!

• Hold Me Now
• Nocturne
• Popular
• Euphoria
• Only Teardrops
• I Feel Alive
• This Is Love
• Occidentali's Karma

— AWESOME meeos ！ * ([ˈjæb.ə ət məɪ])) 01:46, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Username

Why did you change your username? ZoriAlexandra08 (talk) 09:23, 20 May 2017 (UTC)