User talk:CorbieVreccan

Admins watch while you edit. We saw what you did there.

Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update

No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)

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

Skowhegan, Maine

Is it possible to protect this article? The mascot section has been repeatedly vandalized. Indigenous girl (talk) 17:02, 16 April 2019 (UTC) Also, if an individual is going by Skowhegan Indians and they are editing the section on Skowhegan Indians is this COI? There is an organization called Skowhegan Indian Pride and I feel they are representing this organization and making repeated edits which include cutting sourced content without engaging on the talk page.Indigenous girl (talk) 17:10, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

I will consider protection, but when disruption is by only one or a couple accounts, blocking the disruptive accounts is the usual remedy. The name does indicate a probable agenda on the article. What state is the article in at this point? Specifically, I see that the cited content is being altered. I will check this, but are they misrepresenting the sources? - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 17:48, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

They are adding unsourced material and at one point removed the entire section. The reverted a grammatical error as well.Indigenous girl (talk) 17:52, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Is the incorrect information still in the article or were you able to fix it? If it would risk you violating 3RR, can you show me diffs of the misrepresentations? - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 18:05, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

The current content includes the names of individuals who supposedly started the petition drive for a district wide referendum however there are no sources used to indicate this and the user themselves stated it was word of mouth (and that they were there). The fact that they admit 'they were there' leades me to believe that this is in fact a COI issue.Indigenous girl (talk) 18:19, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

OK, delete the content that's not in the sources. Fix the content so it's factual. Be scrupulous about being accurate and NPOV. I will read the sources while you do that. As you are removing unsourced content added by a WP:SPA, which shouldn't be on the 'pedia, this does not look to me like a content dispute or revert war on your part. - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 18:26, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

May you join this month's editathons from WiR!

May 2019, Volume 5, Issue 5, Numbers 107, 108, 118, 119, 120, 121 Hello and welcome to the May events of Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual events: New topics: "May" women / Mayors / Environentalists Geofocus: CEE countries Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman Other ways you can participate: Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:16, 27 April 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Edit source.

Dear administrator. I saw that my last edit was not accepted. I thank you for your message but i don't want to experiment. I know that when it comes to male we refer as "HE" and when it comes to female we refer as "SHE". This is how it is and how it will always be. Kind regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilac Grath (talk • contribs) 21:31, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy, as determined by consensus and WP:ARBCOMM, is that we use the WP:BLP's preferred pronouns, and their most recent statements to that effect, according to the WP:RS sources. Neither your, nor my, personal opinion matters on this topic. We all have to follow the policy. Failure to follow the policy means editing privileges are revoked. If you don't like the policy, take it up at the BLP or similar noticeboards. Cheers, - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 21:40, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Comment on Talk:Indigenous intellectual property

Can you explain your comment:

But, dynamic IP editor who is removing warnings from your pages and who fits the same profile as the UTRS troll, I'd rather have someone who hasn't been disruptive do it.

Why should it matter who makes the change? 5.104.90.107 (talk) 12:21, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Also, I have created an account to ensure that all of my edits going forward are attributed to one username. SolarStorm1859 (talk) 12:47, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Because all your edits up to that point had been disruptive and you had almost been blocked, you were using a dynamic IP despite clearly knowing IP policy, leading to the reasonable assumption that you were editing logged-out to avoid scrutiny, then your signature editing and speaking style was taken up by a new account that is now indef-blocked:[1]. - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 18:21, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

• You may also have a look at: User_talk:Titodutta#Adoption. Regards. --Titodutta (talk) 13:57, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

@Titodutta:, please familiarize yourself with the disruption by the dynamic IP on Indigenous intellectual property and the UTRS vandal block. Thanks - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 18:21, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

I am not connected to the "UTRS vandal". This is another joe job just like NeutralUnbiasedUSA (talk · contribs). 5.104.90.107 (talk) 18:35, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1008#Impersonation — CU, please? and User talk:ConcernedCitizenUSA and you might understand. 5.104.90.107 (talk) 18:55, 28 April 2019 (UTC)