User talk:Chuka Chief

The dffd ftugbbc.

Siyabonga Nhlangwini (talk) 12:18, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Chuka Chief. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Nick Moyes (talk) 17:34, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dealing with vandals

Thank you very much for reporting the offensive comments left on your talk page. I have blocked the IP user and WP:REVDELed their rather pathetic comments. You did the right thing by reporting a user to WP:AIV, but in future you might also like to know that you can use an automated tool called WP:TWINKLE to revert vandalism and leave an escalating series of warnings for them at the same time. There is a very easy way to do this by activating 'Twinkle' in your personal Preferences. Just go to the Gadget tab and the tick the 13th entry down for TWINKLE. From then on will see a 'TW' drop-down menu item next to the main search box in the top right of the page. At the users' page, click the TW then the 'Warn' button and select the most appropriate notice to leave them. These should escalate from Level 1 to Level 4, and thereafter you should go to AIV, just as you did today. Although you didn't go through the escalting series of requests to stop, it was clear they were WP:NOTHERE, so a block was quite justified. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:45, 9 February 2020 (UTC) [reply]

Nick Moyes, thank you for the welcome and the advice on how to handle vandals. I was giving "recent changes" a spin today. I will try TWINKLE. Thanks! Chuka Chief (talk) 17:53, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Thanks for your anti-vandalism work!

S0091 (talk) 19:46, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That is one cute kitten!Chuka Chief (talk) 19:47, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative versions of Green Goblin

What about that "edit summary" thing right ON TOP of "publish changes".

69XXXXXXX.. I don't remember this long number. I'm the one who you pointed this co-called problem out to me "five seconds" ago.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.121.181.163 (talk) 21:15, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I should have used an edit summary, I thought at first you were blanking the article, I did not understand you were doing a move via copy paste to the redirect. However, why are you trying to change the long standing name? Maybe do a Wikipedia:Requested moves? --Chuka Chief (talk) 21:18, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And that is why I don't any money to Wikipedia. You (all) assume I knew (or care) how to do this. 69.121.181.163 (talk) 21:20, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you read Wikipedia:Requested moves and follow that.--Chuka Chief (talk) 21:22, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading information in the 'List of converts to Islam' Wiki page

Hello,

I wanted to apologise if my editing of this article seemed unnecessarily extensive, I've now been trying to reference articles that justify the validity behind the changes for at least some of the listed individuals. It seems that there's an overwhelming amount of individuals on the list for Muslim converts, who are not remotely notable at all as Muslim converts whatsoever but are only known for their radical/criminal activity. Some of them are known only for such things, with little to absolutely no affiliation to the belief-system that this page currently revolves around, whereas others represent an affiliation that is only under the umbrella of very radicalised/distorted ideologies that would also be cruel representations of the belief-system in question. If individuals shall be kept on here purely on the basis of their fulfilling the criteria for being validly identified as 'Muslim converts' it's rather odd that amongst the millions of ordinary converts around the world, each as nameless and unknown as the next, each amongst the plethora of human activities and endeavours, it is only those under the realm of criminal activity, who seem to have been cherry-picked and included in this list; it seems that convicts/criminals make up 31 of the 141 people in this list. I wanted to therefore request if those who are not notable for any endeavour other than criminal activity (a great many of the convicts named in this list), may be removed, and potentially also those whose activity attributed to Islam is quite ridiculously criminalised/radicalised and quite bluntly condemned by their local (as well as the international) Muslim communities who would have to face being associated alongside these people (such as Charles Brooks, Michael Finton, etc) not otherwise worth mentioning (unless as equally notable as the thousands of regular professors and/or doctors who have been equally, if not much more, notable in the public sphere).

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.194.236.68 (talk) 15:58, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey 196.194.236.68! I understand your motivation, however you should try to take this up on the talk page and change the list criteria. At present criteria for inclusion is any convert to Islam who has a Wikipedia page (so is "notable" per Wikipedia).--Chuka Chief (talk) 18:20, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Siyabonga Nhlangwini

Hey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siyabonga Nhlangwini (talk • contribs) 19:30, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yo! How may I help you? --Chuka Chief (talk) 19:39, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Teach me how to publish posts Siyabonga Nhlangwini (talk) 12:19, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]