User talk:Tonymetz

Old content 2016

Your submission at Articles for creation: Earny (May 18) Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KJP1 was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved. If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Earny and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window. If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Earny, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit. If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors. KJP1 (talk) 05:12, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

What part of....

"I won't be partaking" did you not understand? Fred Zepelin (talk) 00:40, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

the low quality citations have not yet been addressed. I pointed out the issues with both. I'm aiming to keep the bar high for citations. If the claim is endorsed by facts, we should have no problem finding high quality sources. Tonymetz (talk) 00:48, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@Fred Zepelin I raised this on Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Joe Kent

Are we being objective on the quality of these citations? Perhaps we should work with a disinterested party? Tonymetz (talk) 00:57, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

This tone and approach is out of line . Let's stay on topic WP:TALK#OBJECTIVE Tonymetz (talk) 01:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Multiple accounts

Please do not use multiple accounts, like Tonymet (talk · contribs) unless for a legitimate purpose as listed under WP:VALIDALT. If you are using the alternate account as an account that you will use to edit on public computers, please indicate so. If it is a doppelganger, no edits should be made from that account. It could be misleading if you use multiple accounts to edit without establishing the connection.

Consider using a template like {{User alternative account banner}} on your user page. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 08:38, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

It was a login bug and has been sorted Tonymetz (talk) 15:10, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

i added that banner thanks it was useful. I don't think there's a way to merge accounts. let me know if there are further suggestions. @0xDeadbeef Tonymetz (talk) 18:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

February 2024

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. — ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 11:45, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Only recent editors were notified Tonymetz (talk) 15:29, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm still learning how to steer discussions. can I ask how you got involved? Tonymetz (talk) 20:18, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I stand corrected, I didn't see you left a message on a third editor's talk page, just the two that had removed it. I'll strike my comment and I apologise. To answer your question; I have a lot of pages on my watchlist, and after the 2022 elections Joe Kent's one is one of them - I saw activity on my watchlist and edited correspondingly. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 21:29, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

thanks that explains it -- and thanks for the guidance -- no worries. feel free to share feedback as I'm still learning about Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. I posted to the to raise discussion . Tonymetz (talk) 21:34, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

WP:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Joe Kent Tonymetz (talk) 21:34, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Stay off my talk page

Per WP:USERTALKSTOP, this is your only warning. Resolve your differences on article talk pages. Edit my user talk again and you'll be blocked. Fred Zepelin (talk) 11:47, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Let’s take it down a knotch. I’m sorry how that was received. I was trying to be more considerate by delivering feedback on your talk page, following the practice of other collaborators, and yourself. Tonymetz 💬 16:28, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

That is a bald-faced lie. This edit was not "trying to be more considerate by delivering feedback on your talk page". It was a revert of my edit that wiped a section of your trolling. Fred Zepelin (talk) 17:49, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

It seemed to have been reverted by accident, and the content had not yet been addressed. Anyone can see from the content of the comment that it was not a troll. It was about the edit on the Joe Kent page. Tonymetz 💬 18:59, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Can you state your agenda and demands so we can figure out how to resolve this disagreement? Tonymetz 💬 19:02, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Kevin Waters (disambiguation)

The article Kevin Waters (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Invalid and unnecessary disambiguation page per WP:ONEOTHER.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 23:26, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 March 2024

• Technology report: Millions of readers still seeing broken pages as "temporary" disabling of graph extension nears its second year

• Interview: Interview on Wikimedia Foundation fundraising and finance strategy

• Special report: 19-page PDF accuses Wikipedia of bias against Israel, suggests editors be forced to reveal their real names, and demands a new feature allowing people to view the history of Wikipedia articles

• Op-Ed: Wikipedia in the age of personality-driven knowledge

• Recent research: "Newcomer Homepage" feature mostly fails to boost new editors

• News and notes: Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee Charter ratified

• In the media: "For me it’s the autism": AARoad editors on the fork more traveled

• Traffic report: He rules over everything, on the land called planet Dune

• Humour: Letters from the editors

• Comix: Layout issue

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:41, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Pestering

I don't understand why you not only pester Fred Zepelin by restoring posts he has removed from his talkpage, but also involve yourself in his disagreement with Biohistorian15. Just leave him alone, as he has asked you to do. Bishonen | tålk 03:08, 5 April 2024 (UTC).

You took one side of the debate and I took the other . That’s how consensus is reached Tonymetz 💬 15:25, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

What? No, you've got hold of the wrong end of the stick. I'm not taking any side in any debate. (Debate about what?) I'm warning you about harassment as an admin action. Same thing as I did with Biohistorian15. Bishonen | tålk 16:40, 5 April 2024 (UTC).

The debate is about Biohistorian15 raising a WP:Hounding concern on User:Fred_Zepelin's talk page. You said that Biohistorian15 should not do that, I said it was appropriate

If a user can threaten admin action (WP:USERTALKSTOP) immediately when an issue is brought to the Talk page, what is the point of the talk page or WP:RUCD?

The more practical question is : there are users trying to help improve collaboration with fred zepelin . Can you offer a constructive way to do so? Is this approach WP:AGF? Tonymetz 💬 16:57, 5 April 2024 (UTC)