User talk:Teratix

Teratix, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Teratix! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like ChamithN (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:05, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jack Petruccelle has been accepted

Jack Petruccelle, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Bkissin (talk) 15:33, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kwame Boateng

Not a problem! Giant Snowman 13:43, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A cookie for you!

Thanks for your very nice copyediting at SpellForce 3. I might have to ask you for your copyediting services on future articles as well.

Regards So Why 13:57, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much

The RfC discussion to eliminate portals was closed May 12, with the statement "There exists a strong consensus against deleting or even deprecating portals at this time." This was made possible because you and others came to the rescue. Thank you for speaking up.

By the way, the current issue of the Signpost features an article with interviews about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

I'd also like to let you know that the Portals WikiProject is working hard to make sure your support of portals was not in vain. Toward that end, we have been working diligently to innovate portals, while building, updating, upgrading, and maintaining them. The project has grown to 80 members so far, and has become a beehive of activity.

Our two main goals at this time are to automate portals (in terms of refreshing, rotating, and selecting content), and to develop a one-page model in order to make obsolete and eliminate most of the 150,000 subpages from the portal namespace by migrating their functions to the portal base pages, using technologies such as selective transclusion. Please feel free to join in on any of the many threads of development at the WikiProject's talk page, or just stop by to see how we are doing. If you have any questions about portals or portal development, that is the best place to ask them.

If you would like to keep abreast of developments on portals, keep in mind that the project's members receive updates on their talk pages. The updates are also posted here, for your convenience.

Again, we can't thank you enough for your support of portals, and we hope to make you proud of your decision. Sincerely, — The Transhumanist 00:06, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: if you reply to this message, please {{ping}} me. Thank you. -TT

Portal RfC

You posted a nice thank-you message on my talk page for my support of the Portal system, but I was actually partially supporting depreciation :). I supported depreciation because I wasn't convinced portals could be maintained, but on seeing the amazing response from editors (you in particular), I would've changed my vote.

P.S. It might be time to archive some of your talk page... Tera TIX 03:08, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deprecation isn't deletion, and therefore you were also partially opposed to the proposal. And saving portals in any form, preserves them for possible reviving or leapfrogging later. Hence, my heartfelt thanks. And with technology advancing so rapidly, I don't believe they would have stayed deprecated for long. See accelerating change. If you like our responses at the RfC, you should check out the development threads at WT:WPPORT. — The Transhumanist 04:16, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fiona Nash

As far as I can tell, her website appears to be offline, which is perhaps why the editor concerned is removing such content? -- Longhair\^talk 23:40, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. Tera TIX 23:43, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For keeping Ricardo clean — Safety Cap (talk) 04:45, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Just trying to help out

Tera TIX 05:36, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Find sources by yourself next time. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 01:49, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Abelmoschus Esculentus: If you rollback an edit that removes unsourced material, surely the onus is on you to find a source. That said, I promise to be more proactive when finding sources in future situations like this. Still learning :) Tera TIX 02:06, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	thanks Editman5 (talk) 06:54, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Editman5: No problem! Tera TIX 06:56, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Respect other editors!!

I am so absolutely sick and tired of working for hours to carefully edit a Wikipedia entry appropriately, only to have some uninformed schmuck spend one second ignorantly destroying everything I've done. I realize that I am in the distinct minority of being a conservative in the overwhelmingly liberal Wikipedia world, but might there be some liberals who actually care for honesty and integrity? Your deleting my corrections to the Vince Foster alleged suicide article, without bothering to spend a moment finding out if you have a leg to stand on - that was the straw that sent me off the edge. Too often those who share your narrow worldview have done the same to my edits, and I simply can't stand it anymore. Can you find six studies supporting the claim that Foster's death was a suicide? If so, name them!! But you can't, so why would you delete my correction? Do you believe you know more about the Foster case when you are 10,000 miles away, than I do right here? How many articles have you read on the subject? How many books? I've been watching this case for 25 years. Have you? Why did you delete my correction regarding David Brock's background? The previous claim was simply false, and if you don't believe me, go read what David Brock himself wrote. If anyone gives a damn about the truth, how about reading Ambrose Evans-Pritchard's work re Foster's death? Or are you simply ready to admit that the truth takes a backseat to your political beliefs? If you bother to read the evidence of homicide, let me know where Evans-Pritchard went wrong. As someone who has had an avid interest in true crime for decades, I think I know what evidence looks like. Do you? And more importantly, do you care at all?? Lastly, I have made approx. 300 Wikipedia edits in my time. I challenge you to show me ONE where what I wrote was not fair and balanced. One! Go ahead. I'm waiting. ~~ Vcuttolo (talk) 09:12, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Vcuttolo: I don't mind what's in the article, as long as it's reliably sourced. You provided no sources for your contributions, so... Tera TIX 05:24, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Vcuttolo: I've now had a chance to look into the matter more deeply. First of all, I would like to emphasise that I am not a 'liberal' and have no 'ax to grind' regarding the subject; in fact, the first I'd heard of it was when I edited the article. I know it can be frustrating to have your edits reverted, but they are still present in the page history so you can easily re-insert them. A couple of things:

The New York Times and the Washington Post are respected sources which refer to the incident as a suicide and theories to the contrary as conspiracy theories. When you changed 'conspiracy' to 'alternate' and 'death' to 'suicide', that made me think at the time that you were trying to push a POV inappropriately and was the main reason I reverted your edits.
After subsequent research, I think you are correct on the number of investigations – 5.
I'm not sure about the chunk of text about David Brock's political leanings.
I would recommend proposing these changes on the talk page since you have been reverted by other editors as well.

I apologise if you felt you had been unfairly treated at any stage. I am optimistic that the result of this discussion will be a better, well-cited article. Tera TIX 04:24, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Link removal

The link what I have subbmited has been removed because “it seems inappropriate.” Is it any way that website link can be approved JBSZBO (talk) 03:28, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@JBSZBO: As Thewolfchild explained, that list is only for notable agencies (i.e. agencies that have received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic). Otherwise, the list would become more like an advertising directory. For further information, see our guidelines on external links and our notability guidelines. Tera TIX 07:09, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The edit I made to List of Finnish monarchs and Heads of State

The additions I made were just English translations of their epithets. I don't think a source is necessary for that. --2001:14BB:420:95A6:C40C:55A6:BCDD:B92A (talk) 13:06, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take your word for it since I don't read Finnish, but please try to be a bit clearer in you summaries next time. Thanks for discussing! Tera TIX 13:09, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ZERO 2 INFINITY

We close the page then. Tell you robot to allow us to close the page.

@81.56.0.40: 1) I don't control Cluebot NG. 2) As I said, companies don't control whether or not Wikipedia has a page on them. 3) If you have a problem with the content, open a discussion on Talk:Zero 2 Infinity instead of blanking the page. Tera TIX 13:22, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please get in touch with our CEO, please provide your phone or other contact details so we make a meeting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.56.0.40 (talk) 13:26, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@81.56.0.40: Why do you want to make these edits in the first place? You said on Danski454's talk page that they're "part of a corporate event", but why do you need to change the links on a public page for a corporate event? Could you copy the article to a company computer (with attribution) and edit it there instead? Tera TIX 23:41, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yo

Don't you dare mimic me by repeating something I said, as you did at My Life as a Teenage Robot. That's why I got tight with you and told you to back off. 68.197.237.168 (talk) 11:10, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And I already have tried to open up a discussion. Look at my contributions as well as the other two editors' contributions who have been edit warring with me on the article. Common sense. 68.197.237.168 (talk) 11:12, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's been three damn days since one of the two other editors who were edit warring with me on the Teenage Robot article and the Teenage Robot episode list article have opened up a discussion on the talk page. You honestly think I have the guts to wait? And don't say because they are busy with life. They weren't so "busy" when they were reverting my edits. What's going on now then? Hmmm? Hmmm? Hmmmmmmmm? 68.197.237.168 (talk) 11:18, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@68.197.237.168: 1. Not mimicking you, just quoting you.

2. I took a look at your contributions – you made personal attacks at User talk:WikiPediaAid which you were blocked for. At User talk:Amaury you wrote "Who are you to revert my recent edits to that guy about the Nickelodeon show My Life as a Teenage Robot?" – to me, this statement seems to imply improper ownership of the article. These comments are not helpful for starting a positive and productive discussion.

3. Wikipedia is a volunteer project – you don't get to set deadlines for other users. Tera TIX 11:44, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jack Petruccelle

The article Jack Petruccelle has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

According to the dates mentioned inside the article, because WP:TOOSOON, living person, nothing special about the references more like tabloid journalism, seems to me more like a self-promotion therefore possible also for WP:COI

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. 194.177.198.8 (talk) 17:34, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]