User talk:PolicyReformer

This user prefers to receive notifications. Please use {{ping}} or {{reply to}} when you reply to him on other pages. No talkback messages are needed.

Editing at My Story (film)

This edit made a number of changes, and I have not checked them all, but there was at least one change which was clearly mistaken, and others, such as removal of one or more sources, which should perhaps have been explained. The change which was clearly mistaken is your changing of the date of the "Use dmy dates" tag from February 2017 to February 2018. The tag was indeed added in February 2017, in this edit. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:53, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

@JamesBWatson: Apologies. I need to reconfigure Huggle to not combine mult. edits from same user. Of the combined edits, this edit regarding awful reviews, this edit inserting some gibberish, and this edit removing positive review information (and thus aligned with the POV issue from the awful review edit) caused concern over POV editing without summary and gibberish insertion. I concede that the date tag edit was proper revert of the recently prior vandalism. I will be more cautious in the future. Thanks for letting me know! --Policy Reformer(c) 21:21, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

I didn't notice the "(HG)" for "Huggle" at the end of the edit summary. If I had noticed it, my message to you would have been rather different. I haven't used Huggle recently, but years ago I used to use it very extensively, and I know how easy it is to do things like this without realising. Huggle is a very useful tool, but it needs to be used with care. I used to keep a separate browser window open alongside Huggle, and check the editing history in that window before reverting, except in trivial and obvious cases. Obviously, that slowed down my anti-vandal work to some extent, but I think some slowing down was a price worth paying to stop mistakes slipping through. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:00, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: YOUR REASON HERE Bkzaraaa (talk) 13:39, 14 July 2018 (UTC) Hello Policy reformer,

You recently reverted on of my edits. Your page shows that you are open for debate over misconceptions or errors. Please allow me to tell you that I am in no way affiliated with the charity in question but I have had the chance to donate through them and I chose them because of their level of transparency and accountability that anyone can verify just like i did online when I was looking for a ngo to sponsor an orphan. I also have a wide knowledge of Gulf politics which make me understand why such allegations against charities in Qatar and would invite you to read about the current political climate that makes Qatar a regional target for diffamation (I am not a qatari citizen). The NGO tries to do the best it can to show its transparency and international organizations such as UN agencies would never collaborate them with them if there was a funding to these accusations. QC works with UNHCR, OCHA, the Red Crescent on almost a monthly basis to save millions of lives across 3 continents, and it is so sad to see this work compromised because of rising islamophobia and because wikipedia attracts copiers pasters.

@Bkzaraaa: Thanks for reaching out. It appears that you are trying to edit in good faith, but I am concerned that you seem to be exerting ownership over these articles, which runs counter to the project's purpose. Also, Wikipedia is supposed to present a neutral point of view from reliable sources so its content is verifiable. Since the content you are removing, is reliably sourced, I am concerned that you are trying to push one point of view, excluding others. Wikipedia is not here to promote these charities and whether or not they do good work, but is here to be an encyclopedia. If you would like to review some of these policies that I've linked and let me know why you think I'm incorrect based on these community policies, I'd be happy to discuss. Thanks again for getting in touch. --Policy Reformer(c) 15:07, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Additionally, you may find the guidance on using Wikipedia for advocacy relevant to the edits you're trying to make. Hope this helps! --Policy Reformer(c) 15:18, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Mark Bonney wikipedia page

Dear Sir/Madam,

All the changes I made to my father's wikipedia page were in alteration of mistruths previously published on the site. My father did not go to school in Cambridge, but went to Northgate Grammar School in Ipswich. The other things I edited were merely things that I deemed to be bad English, syntax or grammar.

I expect to see the edits put in place immediately so as to give a truthful telling of my father's career, as well as maintaining Wikipedia's credibility. I am happy for you to remove the edits regarding 'Personal Life.'

Yours sincerely, Elly

@Ellybonney2: It sounds like you might have a conflict of interest, and in fact may have been adding information about yourself which can make it difficult to present information from a neutral point of view. (Click the blue links to learn more about Wikipedia policies.) I have no reason to doubt your statements, but generally editing when you have a conflict of interest and failing to provide verifiable reliable sources runs against several community policies. Perhaps you can make suggestions on the article's talk page to direct the community to sources that support your statements while avoiding some of the conflict problems? Thanks for your time. --Policy Reformer(c) 21:09, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Revert of Copy Vio Material

Hi PolicyReformer,

You recently reverted my edits on Juliet Simms. It is quite possible that I got this wrong, however the text is flagged here. The website that contains the copyright material is here. If you still believe I was wrong please let me know where I errored. I am new here and learning.

Best,

Kadane (talk) 22:10, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

@Kadane: So sorry. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I reverted my edit. As you already realized, looks like Underwaterecho brought in some of the problematic material recently.

@Underwaterecho: Thank you for your work on Juliet Simms as a number of your edits did improve the article. That said, I'd echo (no pun intended) Kadane's message on your page that while working on the project it's important to be aware of adding material that could have copyright problems. Thank you both for your work and sorry I mucked things up. --Policy Reformer(c) 22:24, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

No problem. I am working with the wonderful folks on IRC to navigate wiki policies, and one of them suggested I reach out to you. They have been great and so have you. Thanks for your fast response. Kadane (talk) 22:32, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Happy to help. Thanks again. Happy editing! --Policy Reformer(c) 23:39, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

UTRS Appeal

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

PolicyReformer (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

UTRS appeal #22277 was submitted on Aug 04, 2018 23:33:56.

Notes:

• If you are the blocked user, an administrator will find your request on UTRS and should email you shortly. Please do not request additional unblocks. Tickets may take 24-48 hours to process. Tickets will expire after 1 week if you have not responded via the web interface to any emails from the reviewing administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

--UTRSBot (talk) 23:33, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Clarification for anyone confused by this: I'm presently affected by hard-IP range block. Provided further details explaining reason for need for IP Block Exemption via UTRS. --Policy Reformer(c) 00:05, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Was out of IP Block for a bit tonight, but now caught again in an IP block. --Policy Reformer(c) 02:38, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Please read more carefully

I do not know why this keeps happening but your recent reversion to Little Boxes because I "did not explain it in an edit summery is FALSE. I most certainly DID explain it in an edit summary and I will now go back and do that once again. PLEASE be more careful in the future. Thank you 116.231.78.79 (talk) 03:23, 10 August 2018 (UTC)