Jump to content

User talk:Spencer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Christoper96 (talk | contribs) at 18:24, 12 March 2023 (→‎Request for article update: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


February songs

February songs
my daily stories

Thank you for taking care of ITN! - I was away for most of January. Now I write my own stories, today about a Ukrainian actress born OTD and a cantata that was performed 300 years ago (three days ago). -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:52, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

today: the regional festival - DYK of 13 years ago ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:34, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My story on 24 February is about Artemy Vedel (TFA by Amitchell235), and I made a suggestion for more peace, - what do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:58, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

today: two women whose birthday we celebrate today, 99 and 90! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:12, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition request

Sorry for bothering you, Spencer, but several days ago you've promoted Zaenal Ma'arif to the ITN but I haven't receive the ITN recognition. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 14:52, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done, my apologies for the delay. SpencerT•C 03:31, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Wjemather

Wjemather has been unnecessarily undoing good edits from editors (myself and others ) for three years now. Editors have tried reasoning with that person over time, but that person does not want to listen. Several people in private chats have expressed their frustration with that person, simply because they don't know where else to turn to talk of their frustration.

That person's behaviour has not only been unproked, unneeded undoings of valid edits that no one else has ever had a problem with, but hypocritical also; the list is long of the times that that person would spitefully undo the very same type of edits that they themself have done before, throwing logic out the window. In other words, it's okay for themself, but not for others.

One other behaviour that makes that person unreasonable is making things up on the spot: An editor will do a good edit in the traditional way, but then this person in question will undo the edit with the excuse (paraphrasing), "Just because this is the traditional way is not an excuse to keep doing it that way.".

Trying to reason with that person has failed for years with many who have tried.

I've been editing on Wikipedia since 2007 and had never had any real problems from an editor until that one. I've been doing the same type of edits in the same way since the beginning, and in early 2020 that person came along and decided to be the first to take their own personal feelings and force feed them onto the Wikipedia community with uncalled for retractions that no one else had ever had a problem with. Nitpicking at every single turn, unJusifiably.

Most of that person's edits are undoings,, not additions, meaning the main purpose that person has had over the last three years has been to unneededly undo other people's edits, even when having to make up a reason to do so.

Simply to spite me, that person went and undid a good edit of mine on a page concerning a topic that they no absolutely nothing about:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2022_State_of_the_Union_Address&type=revision&diff=1063538815&oldid=1063093800

Also last year, that person went back on a previously agreed upon standard for preparing the WGC MATCH Play page, one in which that person had willingly agreed to the year before:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2022_WGC-Dell_Technologies_Match_Play&diff=1079435859&oldid=1079434098

It gets worse, you're damned if you do, and damned if you don't; If you do an edit one particular way, that person undoes it and criticizes you, but then if you do the edit the opposite way, that person still undoes it and criticizes you.

I would have to go and do weeks' worth of finding and citing all the examples of that person's gross, uncalled for undoings. For now, I will show a few recent examples of the kinds of edits that no one else ever had a a problem with, but this person is hell bent on interfering with anyway:

Undoing a perfectly good preparation that is done each week on the PGA Tour, for no reason ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Masters_Tournament&type=revision&diff=1141795948&oldid=1141795855

Undoing more preparation that is done as a normal thing in Wikipedia, for no reason ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AThe_Masters_champions&type=revision&diff=1141796145&oldid=1141796054

And those are only two examples of a half a dozen interference type of undoings in the last 24 hours. It takes time and trouble to go and post these here, so I'll stop there for now.

Other times, that person will try to get a page deleted, because in their OPINION the page was made "too early", something of which no one else has ever been known to complain about in recent years. There are links to show proof of this.

After three years of constant interference of spiteful, uncalled for undoings, we will not tolerate it any longer. I have been on here for sixteen years without serious trouble for 13 of them. Over the last three years, this constant hypocritical and unneeded interference won't be tolerated. Even the simple act of letting that person know, they lash back as if you are wronging them in some way, playing the victim.

Since no one has been able to get through to them because of their unreasonableness, we hope maybe you could have a chat with them to see if you can get through. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 04:39, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure how me discussing this with the user would lead to any change given that this appears to be something you and others have brought up with the user already. I am also not very familiar with the content area in particular. I recommend opening a thread regarding this at WP:ANI for further discussion. SpencerT•C 04:43, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The 2023 appointees for the Ombuds commission are AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, JJMC89, MdsShakil, Minorax and Renvoy as regular members and Zabe as advisory members.
  • Following the 2023 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Mykola7, Superpes15, and Xaosflux.
  • The Terms of Use update cycle has started, which includes a [p]roposal for better addressing undisclosed paid editing. Feedback is being accepted until 24 April 2023.

My Sandbox page

Hi, you deleted my sandbox page because you thought it could be an advertising, but it's not. It's only an export of a french Wikipedia page concernant an international company called BCDiploma. As this company is cited in 8 pages of the english wikipedia, and has signed with a lot of well known international organisations, it seems that the company could be eligible to have a page in the english Wikipedia. Please could you restore my sandbox to allow me continuing the work ? Regards, Claire ClaireCoparis (talk) 11:19, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 March 2023

Request for article update

Hi Spencer, I would like to thank you for your response on my edit request which I posted on talk page of "Pacific Biosciences". I have tried my best to respond to your queries. I would be thankful to you if you could review my response and guide me in this regards. Thank you very much. Christoper96 (talk) 18:24, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]