User talk:Chaheel Riens: Difference between revisions
Linxi 1234 (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit |
Linxi 1234 (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit |
||
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
Hello,do you read Harry Potter? [[User:Linxi 1234|Linxi 1234]] ([[User talk:Linxi 1234|talk]]) 00:51, 31 July 2020 (UTC) |
Hello,do you read Harry Potter? [[User:Linxi 1234|Linxi 1234]] ([[User talk:Linxi 1234|talk]]) 00:51, 31 July 2020 (UTC) |
||
The Voldemort article picture was from the movie. [[User:Linxi 1234|Linxi 1234]] ([[User talk:Linxi 1234|talk]]) 00:52, 31 July 2020 (UTC) |
|||
== Thanks == |
== Thanks == |
Revision as of 00:52, 31 July 2020
londoncyclesport.com is good and valid?
The site https://londoncyclesport.com/best-bmx-bikes/ is a "good and valid" link? It's a scraper site, mirroring the very Wikipedia it purports to verify, so it's at best a circular reference, if we could ignore the WP:COPYLINK violations. Besides scraped content, it's nothing but Amazon and other retail referrals. I think you're confused. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:18, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
- Ok, fair enough, however good faith could have been assumed to the original poster. Rather than assuming that the OP knew all the above you could have explained a bit better at least via edit summary - as would have been polite. If an experienced editor such as myself made the mistake of thinking that that the original Wiki text came from the london site, you should assume it reasonable that an IP editor with two edits to their name could also be confused. AGF and all that.
- You should explain your reasoning rather than hit them with yet another template (and no edit summary) which doesn't explain why you've done what you've done. Chaheel Riens (talk) 07:31, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 8
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Top Gear test track, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Billy Baxter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:53, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
About Dolores Umbridge
Yes I will admit that she was a more direct threat but that's different from being a bigger threat. I'm pretty sure you and I can both agree that a mean school official isn't as dangerous as a lord of evil. Plus there's also the fact that she was defeated way too early. Normally the defeat of the main villain is supposed to mean the end of the hero's struggles but by the time she was defeated there were still three whole chapters involving Harry and his friends fighting the Death Eaters. 70.52.175.150 (talk) 04:05, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- Nah, we disagree on this. Umbridge was a far greater threat to Harry and his Scooby gang than Voldemort ever was during the plot of the book. She showed many times that she was indeed not just a mean school official, but genuinely evil. Her very first act (although we don't find out is was her until later,) is to intentionally send Dementors after not only Harry but a muggle who would be unable to defend himself or even see them. Slytherin's locket aids her, recognises her innate evil, and her punishments are basic torture - the blood quill and the Cruciatus Curse. Her early defeat in no way lessens the threat she posed to Harry and the pupils of the school itself. In direct comparison, Voldemort has no manifest presence in the book apart from the last couple of chapters where he fights with Dumbledore. Chaheel Riens (talk) 08:00, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- Voldemort wasn't just doing nothing until the last few chapters. He was trying to search for the prophecy, build his army of Death Eaters and corrupt Harry's mind.70.52.175.150 (talk) 03:53, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
- Still not a direct threat to him, his friends or the school. Voldemort is the primary antagonist for the entire series, but in this book it's Umbridge. Chaheel Riens (talk) 08:36, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
- I think if you wish to discuss this further it might be better placed on the article talk page where other editors can offer comments. Chaheel Riens (talk) 08:43, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
- Voldemort wasn't just doing nothing until the last few chapters. He was trying to search for the prophecy, build his army of Death Eaters and corrupt Harry's mind.70.52.175.150 (talk) 03:53, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello,do you read Harry Potter? Linxi 1234 (talk) 00:51, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
The Voldemort article picture was from the movie. Linxi 1234 (talk) 00:52, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks
In this edit you did what I meant to do. Unfortunately, I misread the diff I reverted and did the exact opposite of what I meant to do. Thanks for cleaning up. :) Toddst1 (talk) 22:42, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
Your rfc closure
Hello. You need to sign your closing comment on the rfc at Talk:Down syndrome#RfC on the first part of the first sentence. --Mirokado (talk) 21:56, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- Done. Chaheel Riens (talk) 07:38, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
- Chaheel Riens, hi - I just came here to give you a message in a less public place. I'm not opposed to you - I'm British, and if you asked me how to spell it, I'd have written Down's. However, I'm an administrator, and part of my job is to see that stuff is done properly. I'm sorry, but that close was done totally improperly. Undo it, let someone else close it, and we're good. GirthSummit (blether) 20:34, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
- I did ask you how to spell it - I raised an RfC regarding it. Please comment there on your preferred option. Chaheel Riens (talk) 08:30, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
- Chaheel Riens, how I personally spell it, and how our article ought to spell it, are two different things. I am not going to involve myself in the content dispute by expressing an opinion on the second thing, since I have been acting on the page in an administrative capacity - one isn't permitted to do both. GirthSummit (blether) 08:52, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
- I did ask you how to spell it - I raised an RfC regarding it. Please comment there on your preferred option. Chaheel Riens (talk) 08:30, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
- Chaheel Riens, hi - I just came here to give you a message in a less public place. I'm not opposed to you - I'm British, and if you asked me how to spell it, I'd have written Down's. However, I'm an administrator, and part of my job is to see that stuff is done properly. I'm sorry, but that close was done totally improperly. Undo it, let someone else close it, and we're good. GirthSummit (blether) 20:34, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
Courtesy notification
Hi, Chaheel. I am a party to the Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine/Evidence; I wanted to let you know that I mentioned you in this section of my evidence. The Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration may be helpful, should you opt to participate in the case, although there is no need for you to do that. I only wanted to make you aware. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:00, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
IP Vandalism
Hi @Chaheel Riens, don't you think that giving this IP only one warning was a little harsh? They did continue vandalizing Andrew Flintoff, however, so if it is justified, maybe applying for a block is in order. Cheers! xRENEGADEx 21:30, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
- XRENEGADEx, I went big bang because although apparently different, the duck test supports the likelihood that this was the same IP editor (or at the very least there is some connection between them,) so it wasn't their first edit but a continuation after vandalism had already been reverted - and an L1 warning left on their talk page. I thought I'd cut to the chase as it seemed obvious they're not here to build an encyclopedia. Now they've continued to vandalise after an L4 warning a block is (probably) justified - as you point out, but they'll probably just switch IP addresses. Chaheel Riens (talk) 22:02, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
- Ok, that makes sense. I was just patrolling RC when I came across this, and didn't know there were probably multiple IPs. I think a block is justified. Maybe you can get a range block? xRENEGADEx 22:43, 21 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by XRENEGADEx (talk • contribs)
I gave that IP an only warning for the edit you undid. The same user just came off of a block on another IP for repeatedly adding random pictures of nude or scantily clad women to various articles. Meters (talk) 21:08, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Moved to article talk page.
About Freeman
- If characters like Doomguy and BJ BlaczkcowiPolishLastName are categorized as "mass murderers", shouldn't Gordon Freeman too? Sergei zavorotko (talk) 17:44, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
- WP:OTHERSTUFF, but I don't think they meet the criteria for mass murderers either. Murder is defined as "the unlawful killing of another human without justification or valid excuse..." - whilst Freeman does kill plenty of people it's always under provocation, or in self defence. Moreover, a considerable number of his killings aren't human.
- Incidentally - what's going on with "BJ BlaczkcowiPolishLastName"? Chaheel Riens (talk) 17:54, 30 July 2020 (UTC)