User talk:Kleinpecan

Welcome!

Hi Kleinpecan! I wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! œ^™ 11:17, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello Kleinpecan... I just saw your edits on my first article "William J. McCluney" (now in "Draft"). Great additions. Thank you! 2600:8805:3800:78:1C2:7362:608:A20E (talk) 16:25, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Kleinpecan will you put through the delete of an inconvenient truth 2, please, rather than let it realist for discussion (there won’t be any discussion as the article is too old). 82.32.45.57 (talk) 09:32, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Kleinpecan. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Nick Moyes (talk) 11:49, 14 March 2021 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

January 2022

Bahria Heights is one of the skyscraper. and you can see the details on the page why you think its inappropriate ?

March 2021

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Monster Trucks (film): you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Firestar464 (talk) 07:54, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

	Thank you (you can come play ball with us anytime)
	For catching and reverting the vandal IP on my User Talk page JW 1961 Talk 20:22, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Speak BS too. Haav Gret Spelingh roit? Btw thanks for de hepl. BlueDaNoob (talk) 17:47, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your help in preventing vandalism on Cabinet of Joe Biden and reporting the IP user! Fireboltsilver (talk) 21:16, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

Appreciate your comments and guidance. I particularly like the mentoring suggestion. I will connect into that for sure. Regards, Roger — Preceding unsigned comment added by MiniatureTimeTraveller (talk • contribs) 00:58, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Content blanking

Regarding your warnings here, with a small number of exceptions, editors are allowed to remove warnings and messages from their user talk pages. See WP:BLANKING.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:51, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, I didn't know this. Kleinpecan (talk) 19:21, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse response

Per this, the tone came off as dismissive rather than accommodative, if you had to nanny them, you might as well have been polite enough to manually summarize the answer proffered to them initially. Your account shows you’re 15 days old, I don’t think you should be answering any questions there. Celestina007 (talk) 01:23, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for removing the articles for deletion tag on the CoVID-19 page. I only did it as a joke and completely forgot that it put an actual thing on the page. I only meant for the Articles for Deletion page to be made with a joke. A Wild Wolf has appeared! | Gotta catch 'em all! (talk) 16:52, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Thanks for the warm welcome... Urpentur (talk) 03:53, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Change on EasyMile EZ10 page

Dear Kleinpecan,

I saw that you restore the changes made on the EasyMile EZ10 page, I'm actually Communications Manager at EasyMile and the information in the former page were very dated and not true. This is why we decided to update them. If we need to proceed in any other way, please do not hesitate to advise us! Thanks for your help. Lucas from EasyMile — Preceding unsigned comment added by LucasEasyMile (talk • contribs) 12:04, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

@LucasEasyMile: I reverted your edits because the article EasyMile EZ10 is about the vehicle produced by the company, not the company itself. If you want to write about the company on Wikipedia, you should create a separate article for it (see Help:Your first article).

Additionally, the text you wrote uses non-neutral and promotional language such as "a leading software provider", "the world leader", "highly-skilled experts" etc. It also doesn't cite any sources (see Wikipedia:Citing sources and Help:Referencing for beginners. Kleinpecan (talk) 12:35, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank You for the INVITE!

I would like to thank you to invite me to the Wikipedia Family. But, I wish to bring to your kind notice that I already own a Wikipedia account. Since I find it tedious to login everytime and at the same time maintain my anonimity, I do not use it.

115.96.219.157 (talk) 10:17, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

wow!

	I DONT CARE
	NOONE CARES Bigbob2300 (talk) 23:43, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Bigbob2300:

This user farts in your general direction. This user also believes that your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.

Kleinpecan (talk) 23:46, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Serious issue with Name

why did you mentioned my name in spam project. I'm not doing any kind of spam. I'm just updating Wikipedia pages then mentioned source of link's Dheeraj budhori (talk) 17:10, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I've removed you from the list. Kleinpecan (talk) 17:17, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi, Kleinpecan. Thank you for removing spam from Wikipedia articles. Based on your contributions, 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:Administrators' guide/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! — Newslinger talk 08:57, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

An Inconvenient Truth 2

Hi, can you see my message on the inconvenient truth 2 edit history, please? I’d be grateful if you could schedule the whole page for speedy deletion- Jack 82.32.45.57 (talk) 12:29, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

I am not sure it fits the criteria for speedy deletion, so I have nominated it for "standard" deletion instead. Kleinpecan (talk) 01:34, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Brit Hume

Hi,

You can't restore BLP violations with a message "Unexplained content removal"[1]. In this case the material was sourced to self-published source (not by the subject). Moreover, specifically "backtracked, saying misleadingly" is original research – in this case editorialising. Politrukki (talk) 18:44, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@Politrukki: This hardly makes the situation any better, but I did not restore it intentionally; I just saw an IP removing text without an explanation and did not bother to actually check what was being removed. I will try to be more careful in the future. Kleinpecan (talk) 22:56, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Very experienced users, including some administrators, struggle to understand that blanking is vandalism only when it can be considered illegitimate. I remember that few years ago a prolific vandalism fighter was reverting "blanking", believing they were reverting vandalism, but ended up receiving a standard block for edit-warring. We make mistakes. We learn from them – or mistakes of others – and move on. Good luck on your journey, Politrukki (talk) 13:01, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

If USA Today wrote about this, would it be appropriate to restore it? Kleinpecan (talk) 23:12, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Restore without modification? No. Carefully paraphrase and/or quote USA Today. Perhaps. A Good Wikipedian would collect all sources about the subject and then carefully analyse how much content, if any, would be due.

The reason why I checked Hume's bio in the first place was because of something I read about Hume in scholarly sources; Joseph Uscinski criticised PolitiFact for a fact-check of Hume where it gave a rating for a prediction of future – after the outlet acknowledged it's not a standard procedure. See: Uscinski, Joseph E. (2015-04-03). "The Epistemology of Fact Checking (Is Still Naìve): Rejoinder to Amazeen". Critical Review. 27 (2): 243–252. doi:10.1080/08913811.2015.1055892. Because the fact-check was not mentioned in Hume's bio, I decided against adding anything to the bio, assuming that other reliable sources have not touched the issue, rendering the topic somewhat niche. Still, I'm considering adding something in the PolitiFact article.

Based on my quick reading of your new source, Hume is only mentioned in one sentence, and is lumped together with others who made similar suggestions. The last sentence in same paragraph provides evidence against the claim of Antifa's involvement. However, that was not a claim specifically made by Hume, whose claim of "leftist extremists" was more vague. It would be a problem to mention Hume's claim without being able to note its dubiousness. Politrukki (talk) 13:01, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

CVUA graduation

CVU Academy Graduate

Congratulations from both myself and all of the instructors at the Counter Vandalism Unit Academy on your successful completion of the Counter Vandalism Unit Academy. You completed your final exam with a score of 98%. Well done! Thanks for helping to revert vandalism here at enwiki - a job that sometimes can feel overwhelming. I've also noticed your contributions to WP:WPSPAM as well - they are appreciated. Pahunkat (talk) 08:58, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

And one last thing - at the start of the course, I stated I would copy the training page into your userspace for future reference. Would you like me to do that? Pahunkat (talk) 08:58, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes, feel free to. Thank you for the training. Kleinpecan (talk) 18:36, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

No problem, it was a pleasure! I've moved it to User:Kleinpecan/CVUA, feel free to move it to another title :-) Pahunkat (talk) 20:29, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! Kleinpecan (talk) 20:30, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

lucci

how do i make my own article for lucci? Symcbt123 (talk) 13:07, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Symcbt123. Help:Your first article provides some useful guidance. However, I would encourage you to edit already existing articles instead of creating new ones. Creating an article is one of the hardest tasks on Wikipedia, and unless you have a lot of experience, it is unlikely to result in anything other than failure, disappointment, and frustration—and I don't want that to happen to you.

If you still want to create an article, then first you need to determine whether Lucci is notable by Wikipedia's standards. Find at least three publications about Lucci that meet all of the following criteria:

1. Discuss him in significant depth (and not just mention him once or twice).
2. Are independent of the subject.
3. Published in a reliable source. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources and Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources for a list of sources that are considered reliable. Note that those lists are not exhaustive, and if you can't find a specific source in them, it does not automatically mean that it is unreliable.
4. Published in a secondary source.

If you can't show that Lucci is notable, it is unlikely that an article about him will be created. Doing so will only waste your and others' time, so it is best to forget about it and find something else to do.

The article itself should be written from a neutral point of view. Do not put your personal opinions or analysis into the article. Do not editorialize and do not use loaded and promotional language (see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch). Make sure you provide a citation for every statement (see Help:Referencing for beginners), especially if the statement is controversial or potentially libelous (see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons). Take a look at the article guidelines for musicians. Read some good and featured articles about musicians—study their layout, language, etc.

Once you are done, submit your draft for review by an experienced editor. Be patient—there are currently 4,500 pending submissions, so it might take some time before yours gets reviewed. Kleinpecan (talk) 02:23, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Draftifying articles

Hello, Kleinpecan,

After you move an article into Draft space and notify the page creator, please tag the original page for CSD R2 speedy deletion. Cross-space redirects from main space are subject to deletion. I find Twinkle very useful in tagging pages for all types of deletion. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:46, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Hatting at Expelled talk

For what it's worth, I wholly endorse your hatting there. I got a little carried away responding to a comment that looked like an unwarranted, drive by WP:PA, when WP:DFTT was the right call. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:46, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Clubhouse (app) Version details

Sorry for removing those details and further spam edits. l had created a template for it but it's not working for some reasons. I tried every method but nit working. I done same for article Spotify Greenroom and Sandes (software), which worked. Do you have any idea about why it's not working in this article? Anoop (talk) 01:34, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

You already asked this question at the Teahouse, and I've replied to it there. (I also don't think your edits were "spam".) Kleinpecan (talk) 01:39, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Tagging pages for deletion

Hello, Kleinpecan,

It's important that every time you tag a page for deletion (CSD, PROD, AFD/TFD/MFD/etc.), you post a notification on the talk page of the page creator. Otherwise, they might not know that the pages they have started have been deleted or why. This lack of information makes it likely that they will repeat any mistakes they have made with the deleted article.

I recommend you use Twinkle and set up your Preferences to "Notify page creator" and then the program will post these notices for you which makes things easy. Please remember this in the future when you are tagging pages for deletion. Thank you! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:49, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Well, to be honest, I deliberately did not notify them as most of those accounts haven't edited for several months and I doubt they will return. So, is it really needed? Kleinpecan (talk) 03:57, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Huh

Never realized that IABot would add archive links to websites that have excluded themselves from the Wayback Machine, thanks for noticing and resolving that. If you're interested, I've submitted a Phabricator ticket to hopefully stop the bot from doing that. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 22:25, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Reason to add in Spam Project List

can you tell me why did you are again add me in spam project list. i already discussed you the reason — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dheeraj budhori (talk • contribs) 12:09, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

It was Newslinger who added you, not me. Kleinpecan (talk) 19:52, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Message

Hi there, I saw your message on my talk page encouraging me to make an account; I just wanted to let you know that this would likely be considered an institutional IP address (I am posting from one of the University of Toronto's Wi-Fi networks) and the contributions associated with this IP address are not mine. 138.51.251.221 (talk) 14:20, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Paula Abdul

Hi, it would have been nice to keep the report open [2], pending a response to my request to protect the article. And yes, I'll file a separate report for that now. 2601:188:180:B8E0:BD4A:4B03:FD4C:CE7 (talk) 00:58, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I somehow skipped over that part. Sorry about this. Kleinpecan (talk) 04:52, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	thnx for your answer on the teahouse! Chefs-kiss (talk) 20:48, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Rollback on Intuit Page

Dear Kleinpecan, I noticed that you restored my changes made on the Intuit page. I was hoping that you could provide a bit more context into your reasoning for this. I truly thought that the information I added to the product section realistically described Intuit’s products without injecting puffery. I understand why the section I added on “corporate responsibility” may have set off some red flags, however, their efforts are well documented and many other companies the size of Intuit have philanthropic mentions on their Wikipedia page. Thank you for the help.

November 2021 (USA Today)

Hi Klein, 2 citations were used. The first was Boston University Libraries, which labeled USA Today as Moderate. The second was University of Michigan Library, which described it as left of center and also left of the average respondent. Assuming both sources are in good faith, this puts USA Today as Center Left, which I would suggest is not a shock to anyone who reads it. This is not meant as disparaging, but as a fairer conclusion than straight Center. I shall leave it in your hands to decide if 'center and left' equals 'center' or 'center left'. Thanks for reading. 80.233.19.28 (talk) 22:39, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

• You're right; I've missed the second citation. Though combining those two sources to say that USA Today is center-left seems like synthesis to me, so I've changed it to "Center (moderate) / Left-leaning". Kleinpecan (talk) 00:26, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
• Thanks for reevaluating, I appreciate you taking the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.233.19.28 (talk) 14:10, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Edit request removals

I've found that engaging those types of edit requests just leads to more drama all around. I normally just revert and give a NOTAFORUM warning to the user. I used to try to engage, but those types of editors, in general, aren't interested in learning why Wikipedia reports things the way it does. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Unjustified removal

Well hello, Seems like you just removed my edit on Talk:Joe Biden where I wrote:

Joe Biden's dementia symptoms 

There are many videos in which Biden speaks incoherently and basically what he's communicating doesn't make sense. He also has huge difficulties in finishing a statement where he would have to rephrase the sentence over and over. Such things are well known in Biden's behaviour and intensified in the recent period. Why the article about Joe Biden doesn't make any mention about such thing? [3]. There are even specialists bringing the discussion over possible dementia symptoms [4]. I don't know why the media rarely reports about these speeches, but I made my research and the videos aren't fake. For instance, recently Biden met the Pope and told him: You're the famous African-american baseball player in America [5] (at 15:05). These things are definitely worth noting, but I can't do it since the article is protected. Since you forgot to justify your action, I have to ask here. Cheers! --Kotys ek Beos (talk) 20:34, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

@Kotys ek Beos: did you read the messages I left on your talk page? Misrepresenting sources is a quick way to get blocked from this topic area. clpo13_(talk) 20:41, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

I didn't claim those were sources. I only brought up the discussion on a talk page. What you are doing and shaping this into is wrong.--Kotys ek Beos (talk) 20:47, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

^{( Buttinsky)} If it is not sourced and cannot affect article space, I don't see why it would be suitable for discussion on the talk page. Talk pages are not for general discussion of the subject. Also, according to AP, this video is out of context, and Biden was talking about Satchel Paige, an actual African-american baseball player. ☢️Plutonical☢️ᶜᵒᵐᵐᵘⁿᶦᶜᵃᵗᶦᵒⁿˢ 20:50, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Kotys ek Beos: Your source is WP:DAILYEXPRESS. Your videos are HTTP 404 and WP:RSPYT. And...nope.[6] soibangla (talk) 21:45, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

MKuCR AfD (your removal two !comments for arguments to avoid)

In regard to this, while I personally agree with your reasoning, I am not sure outright removal is or was a good way to do that, especially when I would say it applies to majority of 'Keep' votes — a note or tagging would be better. Davide King (talk) 23:01, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

I think a note would only introduce more clutter to this already unbearably long page. Kleinpecan (talk) 00:16, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

revert of good faith edit

Please excuse that, and thank you, but people want their say at this stage. ~ cygnis insignis 16:47, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Joe Biden's Military Junta

About the Military Junta thing on the Conservapedia article., while I do not have any secondary sources, it should at least serve as an example? Especially since there are other citations from Conservapedia itself in the same article which are used to support statements (e.g. conservapedia's rules), this statement should not need a secondary source. Yours truly, ☢️Plutonical☢️ᶜᵒᵐᵐᵘⁿᶦᶜᵃᵗᶦᵒⁿˢ 20:51, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

A secondary source is needed to confirm that the claim about Joe Biden is false. (I have no doubt that it is, but I also have no doubt that some pedant will later remove it due to its lack of references and it being "original research".) And picking out this particular article seems like cherrypicking; there are a lot of stupid statements on Conservapedia, and, because we cannot copy the entire website on Wikipedia, we need to have secondary sources decide which examples are worth mentioning and which are not. There are also already plenty of examples in § Conflict with scientific views. Kleinpecan (talk) 21:03, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Ah, so it's a green cheese kind of thing, isn't it? I guess that's what I should expect from a political article. ☢️Plutonical☢️ᶜᵒᵐᵐᵘⁿᶦᶜᵃᵗᶦᵒⁿˢ 15:41, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Yeah. Kleinpecan (talk) 15:42, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

December 2021

Hello, I'm Sundayclose. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Talk:Jimmy Wales, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Sundayclose (talk) 18:42, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Presumably you confused me with 104.174.4.161, whose edit I reverted? Kleinpecan (talk) 18:45, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Facepalm Sincere apologies. You actually fixed the problem. Thanks. Sundayclose (talk) 19:04, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Happens to the best of us :-) Kleinpecan (talk) 19:10, 11 December 2021 (UTC)