Jump to content

User talk:S0091

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RyanJacobson (talk | contribs) at 05:05, 1 November 2020 (→‎Response to Notability Issues). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

You may want to increment {{Archive basics}} to |counter= 3 as User talk:S0091/Archive 2 is larger than the recommended 150Kb.

Hello, welcome to my talk page!

If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom, as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) or "new section" on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~

Attention: I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page—my talk page—as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Thank you!


The Signpost: 2 August 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:25, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanking Soo91

Thank you for the welcome! I'm happy to be here and excited to begin.So can I join the meet up about the coronavirus and add my input ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddemod (talk • contribs) 01:25, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Soo91,I can't wait to begin! So CAN I join the meet up about the coronavirus and add my input? Again thank you for the welcome!! Ddemod (talk) 01:29, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank u 4 showing how to change my user name Soo91but I was in successful . I don't have an email address. Ddemod (talk) 02:07, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gustav von Wulffen

Hello MilHistExp, Your editing of Gustav von Wulffen was not correct. The rank of Sturmführer was changed after the Night of the Long Knifes, and that was after june/july 1934. Bye and greetings,--Maddriver371 (talk) 16:16, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Maddriver371: you accidentally posted to this is my talk page. Pinging MilHistExp so they are aware of your concern. S0091 (talk) 14:57, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oooh, sorry, my mistake. Thanks for the feedback. Greetings, --Maddriver371 (talk) 17:18, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Maddriver371: no problem at all! :) S0091 (talk) 17:21, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake on Mangalwedha?

I wanted to check if you made a mistake removing the comma and replacing it with a nowiki tag on Mangalwedha. Cheesycow5 (talk) 22:58, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Cheesycow5: the comma was my doing, no doubt. The no wiki I did not add (meaning I did not type in no wiki) so not sure what happened there but clearly it was part my edit. I think fixed it. Let me know if you see any other issues and thanks for bringing it to my attention. S0091 (talk) 23:10, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, thanks for fixing it. Cheesycow5 (talk) 23:12, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am at a lost

Soo91 I am at a lost,I want to contribute to Wikipedia but I have no idea how to get started.I don't know how to find the user pages of people who are editing the pages of bands/music(mostly heavy metal) and the history of it.Can you point me in the right direction please and give me some advice on how to REALLY CONTRIBUTE to Wikipedia. Also I've made a some edits that I'd like to erase,how do I go about that.Thank you for your past responses also! DdemodDdemod (talk) 23:53, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ddemod: try WikiProject Metal. I will give you a word of caution, so far you have not contributed anything of value to Wikipedia which will be only tolerated for a short time. If you are truly interested in contributing, I suggest starting with the Wikipedia Adventure then proving you can make meaningful contributions such as correcting grammatical errors, adding sources, etc. I do hope you find your way here because Wikipedia needs all the constructive editors it can get but this is not a playhouse so please keep that in mind. I will certainly be here for you as long I can see the value you are adding (or trying to add). S0091 (talk) 00:16, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :)

Andres Soop (talk) 15:13, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for sharing the policies and guidelines - it is greatly appreciated.TrimtheCat (talk) 01:06, 11 August 2020 (UTC)Ann[reply]

Hello

I saw your message thank you, I really love Wikipedia and I am following long time ago so I want to contribute woth the little I have known. And I want an expert to guide me through on how to to create intresting articles and make perfect edits. Thank you. Maliky (talk) 22:09, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maliky (talk) 22:10, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Maliky: I suggest starting with The Wikipedia Adventure, which is an interactive tutorial to editing. No one makes "perfect" edits; we all make mistakes here and there. Once you get a feel for editing, then try creating an article. You may find this short essay helpful as a starting place to understanding Wikipedia's notability guidelines. If you have questions or need help, you can reach Teahouse where experienced editors are around to lend a hand. S0091 (talk) 22:23, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank yoi very much for you kindness Sir. Maliky (talk) 15:00, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

citation in J B Bury

Hello, I find one edit of mine reverted, marked with “WP:OR (TW)”. I’m not sure how to interpret this. I didn’t expect the simple rectifying a citation of the original source counting as “research”. RomFan (talk) 10:15, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Masih ad-Dajjal: Revision history

You reverted my edit without any reasoning to explain why? I made the change as it mentioned beliefs not strongly aligning with Islamic views. IF you make an edit it's common courtesy to mention why. Thanks.Alif2020 (talk) 12:05, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Restoring long hard work added to hCaptcha

Information icon Hello, I'm 174.197.146.179. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks.Template:Z186 174.197.146.179 (talk) 18:27, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

False flag.

I don't know why but I've been flagged for vandalism of Wikipedia pages for TV shows and stuff I have neither watched nor have any interest in, let alone editing the wikipedia of. If you could give me back the rights to edit that would be great as I do actually contribute from time to time, eg. getting the Star Wars page sorted. Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.252.133.215 (talk) 20:34, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Changing Zynex's page

Hello! So I do see a source cited on Zynex's page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zynex) for the change I made today. I changed the amount of money the CEO started the company with to a $2000 limit on his credit card (changed from $4000). I work for Zynex and our CEO (Thomas Sandgaard) said the cited source is incorrect. I would assume a firsthand source is stronger than a secondhand source. How can I get this changed?

50.236.129.206 (talk) 22:08, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 August 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:33, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Complete Apology

Hey soo91 i am very very sorry for wasting your time here at wiki I don't know what I was thinking of when I logged into this site without being serious about it.So I'd like to know if I fully delete my page in Wikipedia? Every single thing and all my stupid comments.i thank you for being patient with me . Really. But some good still came out of my foolishness, I've now joined wiki commons,I plan to take it slowly and seriously, I really like taking pictures (who doesn't ) so I'm more comfortable there. So again I am VERY VERY sorry for being a complete idiot. (Honestly I think being on lock down sent me a little weird ) so please forgive me!! Ps : my family uses this site for like every piece of information they need !!! Your fabulous!! Sincerely yours with still more apologies Ddemod Ddemod (talk) 02:03, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, no need to apologize Ddemod! I think you are being too hard yourself. You gave something a try and found it was not a good fit and better find that out sooner rather than later. Your edits to any space other than your User page cannot be deleted but if you do want your User page deleted, just put {{Db-u1}} at the top. You can also simply just blank it yourself. Good luck over a Commons!. S0091 (talk) 14:25, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Amanda Nunes

Hello S0091 ! Firstly i want to apologize for my English right at the start, it's not my native language, but hopefully I can express myself intelligibly here. You recently reverted my edit on the Amanda Nunes page, citing insufficient sources as the reason. I added in the claim that "she is widely considered to be the greatest female MMA fighter of all time", which was orginally contributed in by another user (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/962847761), who also sourced and supported it with references to the official UFC website, TMZ and Fox Sports. It was later deleted by someone without reason being given (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/966566706), but the original references were left there so I just added in the statement back. If the reason you reverted my edit was because you found the source websites to be insufficient, i respect it, but I just wanted to check if there wasn't a misunderstanding where you thought the references were related to some other information in the article and the claim I added was completely unsourced, which was not the case. I also added that besides being the first, she is also the only double champion so far to defend both belts while holding them simultaneously, which is factually true. It was added in back in June (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/961630892) and was then deleted in August under reasoning that Henry Cejudo also accomplished this when defending his title against Dominic Cruz (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/974241592), which is plainly wrong because he vacated his flyweight belt before defending the bantamweight one against Cruz and did not hold them simultaneously at the time, which is also clear from Henry's own Wikipedia page. I would like to know what exactly was wrong with that addition, since it was reverted as well. Thank you for your time and have nice day/night :) 2A02:AB04:2F43:5000:4CB:6CBA:9F11:C063 (talk) 19:50, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like this is rectified. The edit I reverted has no sources attributed the the statement which is why I reverted it. I see you (or someone) added it back with sources. Please do note tabloids like TMZ are not considered reliable and even Fox Sports may not be depending on the context, etc. For example, opinion pieces or blogs are generally not considered reliable. If you find the content is removed again, the next step is to start a discussion on the article's talk page to gain consensus, similar to what you did here. Oh, and your English is fine so no need to apologize or be self-conscious about it. Thanks for the note. S0091 (talk) 13:45, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Publishing a page from sandbox

Hello S0091. Thank you for leaving an encouraging message! I was wondering if you could help me move a finished article from my sandbox to a published page on Wikipedia? Thank you for any assistance! --Imwhalen403 (talk) 22:11, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Imwhalen403: I added the {{userspace draft}} template so you can now submit it for review. S0091 (talk) 13:53, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your help! I'm really grateful. --Imwhalen403 (talk) 21:20, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

I thought that I was "publishing" to Sandbox not the live site. My apologies! Thank you for the information

Greglockard (talk) 18:39, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Greglockard: it was not in main space (where articles are) so no worries there. I moved it because it was on your main User page which is for describing your interests and activities related to editing Wikipedia rather than creating an article. It is now in your "proper" sandbox. No need to apologize. This is common for brand new editors (i.e. how would you know??). :) S0091 (talk) 18:48, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lionel0OJ5

Hi! S0091, am so gland u messege me, have a blessed sunday! Thank u for ur kindness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lionel0OJ5 (talk • contribs) 18:52, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not getting it done(frustrated!)

HI again,Im not getting my page deleted(I don't understand the instrutions you give me)could u just delete it for me?I give all the permission in my power.You don't need to respond,just please PLEASE delete it!!Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddemod (talk • contribs) 01:11, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ddemod: Only an admin can delete pages. Let's try this. Just post a note on your User page stating you want it deleted and be sure sign it will the four tildes (type ~~~~) and I will place the template for you. S0091 (talk) 13:58, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RE: "edit warring"

Hello, and thanks for leaving a comment on my talk page. Although it may seem that I am trying to protect a "preferred version" of the mentioned page I am merely attempting to undo a broad and targeted smear campaign that Wikipedia has played host to on said page. It seems to have largely flown under the radar and I simply have removed information and sources deemed unencyclopaedic. You may check the known bias of said sources and easily discover that they are funded largely by enemies of the Labor party of Australia, who are known to have widely attempted to discredit the achievements of the party while they were in government. It is important to freedom of speech in Australia that such skewed sources are not perpetuated and presented as fact, and I consider the normalisation of such sources a stain on Australian democracy. If I can provide any further information please do not hesitate to leave another comment on my talk page, but I implore you to understand that these changes were made in good faith so as to preserve the integrity of Wikipedia. Ghostpol (talk) 03:52, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ghostpol: the appropriate place for this discussion is on the article's talk page as I was not the only editor to reverted your changes. Whether you realize it or not, you are edit warring. Please read the linked page where it specifically states that being right is not a defense. Most editors that have disagreements are doing so in good faith as they believe they are right and doing what is best for the encyclopedia. I do not doubt that is the case here. Please note, you removed content that was sourced to three different sources. You will need to establish all three are not reliable. Generally, the place to do that is the Reliable sources Noticeboard where other editors can participate in the assessment as the implications are broader than just this one article. S0091 (talk) 15:19, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hi, thank you for accepting the article on Vera Deacon.--TrimtheCat (talk) 07:00, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @TrimtheCat: actually MurielMary accepted that article so pinging them here so they get your message. Congratulations by the way! I know you here for an edit-a-thon but do hope you stay around. S0091 (talk) 15:27, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all the intro materials

I look forward to learning. --Art to Tech (talk) 17:11, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Big gay love

I love you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C7:BD97:C000:758D:5A58:BFB7:8FAA (talk) 23:28, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sharing your gay love! S0091 (talk) 23:38, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Thanks for the welcome, and for those tips! I admit I'm someone who learns best by doing, but now that I feel like I've gotten something "done" that I'm passionate about, I'll step back and read some of the tips so I can do a better job as I go forward.--PDXMaria (talk) 19:10, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@PDXMaria: Sure! Whatever works best for you and your learning style. You might consider the Wikipedia Adventure which is an interactive tutorial or simply just dive in. Your sandbox is also great place practice, especially with wiki syntax. There is a shortcut to it at your top right menu. S0091 (talk) 19:23, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi S0091, thanks for your welcome message and the helpful inputs. I appreciate that. Jbrl5 (talk) 00:25, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

for the welcome - I have been active for a while but only now opened a page

Thank you

Hi S0091, I am trying my best, just beginning. I like to correct obsolete information rather than add new stuff. Please let me know if I do anything wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wijkemvan (talk • contribs) 21:56, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Wijkemvan: Improving content is as much needed here, if not more, than adding new content. If you you are unsure about something, need help, etc., you can ask at the Teahouse. I will also try to check in and feel free to drop by anytime. S0091 (talk) 22:03, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 September 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:48, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 September 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:54, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your cut-and-paste move of User:TheElliotAlderson/sandbox

Could you tag the page as {{db-g7}} please? It was G5 eligible as the creation of a sockpuppet in its original version, but since you cut-and-paste moved it, it's yours now. Do I need to tag you with a {{uw-c&pmove}}? Cabayi (talk) 08:11, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Cabayi: Oh no! Sorry about that. I thought had come across advice somewhere (Teahouse?) copy/paste was how to handle moving content from a User page but sounds like I misunderstood. So I should be performing a Move instead? I was worried about leaving a redirect, even temporarily, on someone's User page. I have now tagged the page as you requested and thanks for kindly not leaving me the full blown template, even though I deserved it. :) S0091 (talk) 15:55, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for tidying up. Cabayi (talk) 15:59, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What error did I commit?

Hi, S0091.

I just noticed an alert while opening Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:93.176.130.155&diff=cur

If I'm not mistaken, it's rather old, but I you have ways of verification, could you, please, explain me what is this about? What did I do that I shouldn't? What content did I remove?

Otherwise, if it's too complicated, just let it be. I don't think its too serious, if I have not noticed it in two years, but I'd just like to know not to repeat the error in another occasion.

Respectfully, Artsider — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artsider (talk • contribs) 15:31, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Artsider: Oh wow! That was really long time ago and in reference to this edit where the IP removed a section from the article without explanation. Most IP addresses are reallocated to different people so I doubt this was even you. In any case, no need to worry. S0091 (talk) 16:04, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Horgan

I have reached out on the TALK page for this article several weeks ago and mentioned some suggested changes. Joeyconnick is one of the users that back in August, said "take it to the talk page". I did that but he did NOT respond. Now, several weeks later now that an election has been called in our Province, Joeyconnick and others have been going making changes to this page WITHOUT reaching a consensus and without making any attempt to discuss this. I can only assume that people running the campaign for this political party are adding in obvious biases in this article, including Joeyconnick. So again, he said "take it to talk" which I tried a while back, he would NOT discuss any changes, and now he and others are making obviously biased changes to this article now that an election has been called.

I believe that you reverted to a version of the document which is older. I kept reverting back to one that has been there for a while. Can you please do something about this? Again, instead of trying to reach a consensus, people including Joeyconnick are making obviously biased additions to this article. Can you please revert back and possibly lock this article or somehow ensure that people discuss any protentional changes in the talk section before any further changes are made?

Please read over the changes and you will clearly see what has been going on. The election was called on September 21st, 2020 and you can see the activity since then from Joeyconnick and others, activity which was done without any discussions.

Thank you for your assistance and please stay safe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VirtualVisionary (talk • contribs) 22:22, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@VirtualVisionary:, were you editing while logged out? It's best to be honest. I also see you blanked your talk page which you are allowed to do (it means you have read and understood the messages) but can you please explain why? S0091 (talk) 22:50, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I did not bother logging in. With that said, I know that my IP address is connected to my account. If I was trying to hide that fact, I have tools at my disposal. Without going into greater detail, I have been using computers since the early 80s including BSSing and coding ML on the C64. So while I do not want to mention specific tools, again, I was aware of that my IP was visible and I simply did not bother logging in. If I mention QSD / 2600 / HP then you will have some idea. As for the talk page, I noticed that Joeyconnick did the EXACT same thing. Please check that for yourself. I posted a message on his talk page multiple times, asking him not to make further changes, and he blanked that out. Again, he was originally the one to take it to the talk page then without saying a word, goes and make changes himself. I reside in the province where this election was just called. One party in particular is using trolls all over Facebook and other social media in the comments section. That could be considered election interference. I let the other party know about this. Based on what I see, one party appears to be using users to modify the Wikipedia pages of one of the other competing parties, adding in biased references, and modifying the page of their candidate with only favorable information. Again, please check this for yourself. Normally, the Premier of a province (same thing as a Governor in a State) has many their full political record listed, including the positives the negatives. For example, the Premier of Ontario: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doug_Ford As you will notice, there is a COVID-19 pandemic section listed, controversies, etc. John Horgan, the article I tried to edit, is the Premier of BC. There is almost NO record of his political views, the positives and negatives of policies, etc (all of these have been in the news). When I tried to add this in, Joeyconnick and it looks like others in the party cried "fowl", said take it to talk, then refuse to explain or help add in info. Is this fair, especially during an election cycle? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.157.64.6 (talk) 01:03, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are not helping yourself here. You have edited logged out again, which is against policy, and blanked your talk page again which is allowed but not a good a look. Joeyconnick has responded to you on the article's talk page so please continue the discussion there. There are several avenues for dispute resolution but please be aware your conduct will be investigated as well and you have not done yourself any favors. Please also be aware Wikipedia does not care whether we are in an election cycle or not. This is a WP:BLP article so the utmost case must be taken and we are volunteers here so it takes time. Content disputes can go for months (if not for years). S0091 (talk) 02:09, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for this. Again, force of habit regarding logging out and not bothering to log in again. I blanked my talk page as I normally do not edit articles on Wikipedia nor do I intend to in the future. I simply want to ensure a balanced and neutral election process. I am involved in election security and can see a far from election process here in BC. I only moved to this province three years ago and once I heard that one of the political parties was considering calling an early election, I started digging around to see how elections here in BC are handled and what information there is on the political parties and their leaders.

To my surprise, I was shocked when I noticed that there is a leader of Province that has nearly no information listed about them, their political views, statements made, and any controversies. This is not normal as a Premier of a province normally has a great deal information listed about them, both positive and negative. In this case, only positive information is listed. I do not represent any one political party nor am I becoming involved in this to “swing the vote” however I have noticed one party in particular that seems to be using trolls, social media, and Wikipedia to swing the vote. Again, I am not hiding my intentions nor what I am trying to accomplish, which is simply balance and to ensure that as much truthful and factual information as possible is provided to the voters about all of the political parties and their leaders.

I responded to Joeyconnick yesterday and not surprisingly, after I suggested a more neutral and unbiased blurb about the election call, he disappeared as he has done in the past. I added in a few more suggestions today, all of which are based on news media coverage of the election. I suspect that he will not respond or you will see someone else respond eventually. Please keep in mind that last time he said, “take it to the talk page”, I made suggestions but he disappeared until an election was called then without warning or discussions in the talk section, he started making changes to the article. Please read over what I wrote and judge for yourself what is occurring based on his Joeyconnick’s suggestion, my response, and the way in which others have edited this article. For full transparency and to ensure that we can work towards an unbiased and factual based election process, please see this article as well: [1] This is the current leader of one of the opposition parties though he never served as the Premier of the province. Yet, prior versions of this Wikipedia feature countless negative and extremely biased viewpoints including countless controversies that were mentioned. However, John Horgan has actually served as Premier (equivalent to a Governor) of a province and yet, the minute we try to balance this document by adding something in that the news media (not me or anyone else) has portrayed as negative, people step in and cry foul. Again, please do not take my word for it and examine the prior versions of both articles yourself and you will see what is going on. Compare John Horgan’s Wikipedia article to the Premier of Ontario [2] and see for yourself what is going on. Will this lead to a fair and balanced election here in BC when voters do not have all of the facts? One party in particular floods negative comments about the other party all over comments sections in news media Facebook pages whenever an article is posted about the election. Essentially, using trolls though I believe the other party has now taken note of this. And for full transparency, again, unlike other editing articles on here, I have nothing to hide from anyone. I am one of the parents featured in this news article: [3] We took the Province to the BC Supreme Court after John Horgan announced a back to school plan which we and countless parents considered to be extremely dangerous and would place our children in harm’s way. The lawsuit was featured all over the news, my son I are were interviewed for countless news stories, and the back to school plan was and still is one of the most controversial news topics in the province’s history. Quite frankly considering how this election is being handled online, this may be another newsworthy story. Yes, that is the point I am at. I believe that we deserve a balanced and fair election process and that one party should not be using trolls, scrubbing articles on Wikipedia, and manipulating the other articles for eventual political gain. Again, I do not represent one party for another. In fact, for full transparency, if Horgan eventually changes the back to school plan, I would vote for him! But either way, he was the Premier and every voter deserves and should be made aware of his political views, any controversies such as the Transmountain pipeline expansion project, etc. Then, this is up to voters to decide how they want to vote.

Anyhow, thank you again for all of your assistance in this matter and please stay safe!

Bernard — Preceding unsigned comment added by VirtualVisionary (talk • contribs) 18:16, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @VirtualVisionary: I am not getting involved in this content dispute. Please understand everyone here is a volunteer. Editing Wikipedia is not our job so folks are not around everyday, 24/7. Generally, I only edit on the weekend so it can take me a week to respond to inquiries. I am sure Joeyconnick, who has been an editor here for almost 15 years and is quite active (according to their contribution history, I don't know them) will respond in the next couple of days or so. You do need cease making accusatory remarks about them as that will not be tolerated. Please also know based on what you stated above, you have may have conflict of interest given the lawsuit and your involvement. I will leave some some information about how to handle a COI on your talk page. It may be worth a trip to the COI Noticeboard to get input. S0091 (talk) 18:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Joeyconnick: so they are aware of this conversation. S0091 (talk) 19:06, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not employed, do not represent, or have any type of affiliation with any political party. The legal challenge we filed was against the Government of BC in the BC Supreme Court, so not against any one specific party or individual. I should mention that there were over 42,000 parents that filed a petition against the back to school plan and countless others that shared their concerns online and in TV interviews. I do not believe that any one of these parents, teachers, or school staff could be considered as having a conflict of interest against one specific party or in the election process. Please let me know how I should proceed with the COI as again; I do not feel this is warranted?

As mentioned, I am involved in election security and this is the primary reason why I became involved in Wikipedia. For reasons which I am sure you will understand, after you view these documents, I will need to delete the documents from my Google Drive and delete this conversation from your talk page even though this information was at one point publicly available:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sgzKbAxvPA-4UwxmfiezGv6HEZDWnzLZ/view?usp=sharing [4]

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10M9r5b3Oj8seejymlCC-6fLo48A61zhJ/view?usp=sharing [5]

Please let me know how I can proceed with deleting the documents and relevant section from your talk page. Thank you. Please also note that I cannot disclose any more recent work that my company has been involved in. I believe that Adam Schiff has been working with Wikimedia Foundation on United States election related issues as they are now running rampant and interfering with the election process. I have had very little prior interest in examining the full extent of what has been occurring in Canada regarding Wikipedia and the election process however when I got wind that an election will be called in the province where I now reside, yes, that piqued my interest and I began an investigation regarding what has been occurring in this specific province.

While I do understand that the user in question has been editing articles for 15 years, my specific concern are as follows: August 15th: The user requested that I take it to the Talk page and gain consensus before making any modifications August 15/16th: I posted on the Talk page in an attempt to reach a consensus August 23rd: The user changed one noun September 21st: Election is called September 27/28th: The user reappeared after a period of one month, shortly after the election was called, and they started making changes to this article without discussing the changes in the talk page, as they originally suggested doing back on August 15th. I cannot directly say that there is a political bias at play regarding the specific edits and that is up to you and others to judge.

I, as many in the political spectrum, believe that Wikipedia will eventually need to fully verify the identity of any person editing a document that may have serious political implications. The COI disclosure in this day and age is useless. The concern I have is that the other political party in question may eventually get wind of this and there will an edit war between all of the political parties involved. Hence, why there needs to be more regulation, self-regulation, or otherwise. I highly doubt that there will be any disclosure from either political party regarding a COI. Based on a very preliminary investigation I have conducted, there already appears to be a political bias that is being caused by one specific party on social media and on Wikipedia. In Canada, we are already heading down the same path as the United States election and political discourse wise where tactics such as VPN, TOR, and even further troll type tactics are employed.

Anyhow, thank you again for your assistance in this matter, and please let me know when I can remove the sections and links I referenced above.

Bernard — Preceding unsigned comment added by VirtualVisionary (talk • contribs) 21:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wilkinson
  2. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doug_Ford
  3. ^ https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-back-to-school-danger-lawsuit-covid-19-1.5700113
  4. ^ https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sgzKbAxvPA-4UwxmfiezGv6HEZDWnzLZ/view?usp=sharing
  5. ^ https://drive.google.com/file/d/10M9r5b3Oj8seejymlCC-6fLo48A61zhJ/view?usp=sharing

Guidance

Thanks for giving me educating more about wikipedia Econdo 25 (talk) 12:48, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Hi S0091. When I click on a picture, it takes me to another picture. Why is that and how do I fix it?

Love, --Lilkitty200 (talk) 16:23, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Lilkitty200:, which article and which picture? S0091 (talk) 16:46, 11 October 2020 (UTC)@Lilkitty200: reping. S0091 (talk) 16:48, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moderate level of vandalism

Hello S0091,

I'm attempting my first draft article and didn't realise the sandbox would have any effect on other pages (I'm learning though!). Another editor has changed categories in the article to links, because categories are not allowed in drafts. Was this the vandalism you were flagging? Or do other changes need to be made? I'd really appreciate it, if you would point it out. Thanks very much for the help :) Timeousbeastie (talk) 09:44, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Timeousbeastie: I do not see you were flagged for vandalism and your sandbox is not part of the main encyclopedia thus the reason categories are not allowed. I think what happened is you clicked the Submit button on your sandbox page which submitted it to Articles for Creation for review as if your were creating a new article to be part of the main encyclopedia. The message you received was declining it because it is an existing article. If you are simply practicing or drafting changes to an existing article in your sandbox, you just need to select the Publish button (like any other edit) and ignore the Submit button. There is not anything for you to worry about as these are all normal things that happen when a new editor like yourself is learning. :) S0091 (talk) 15:03, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll try to do that in future :) Timeousbeastie (talk) 18:33, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

poor removal on articles

I improved Baseball Mogul and Football Mogul and you reverted it. This is edit war. KristenBell69 (talk) 22:42, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@KristenBell69: It's not WP:edit war but you might want to fix the cite error you introduced with your edit. S0091 (talk) 22:46, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

i will try but i'm not good with the code KristenBell69 (talk) 22:47, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@KristenBell69: You might also want to look into why almost all the edits you have made are getting reverted by various editors. In addition, I suggest you change your username as it misleading, unless you are Kristen Bell and provide proof of that (not to me but to Wikipedia). S0091 (talk) 22:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dimitrios Trimijopulos responding to a message

Thank you for your friendly welcome and the information provided.

I have to confess that I do have a problem, and that is to be able to stay neutral in topics dealing with Egyptology. What ancient Egyptian texts reveal is extremely crude and Egyptologists chose to remain politically correct and let it stay there, hidden into the texts, by leaving without translation key words such as ‘ba’, ‘ka’, and ‘akh’. I am preparing to edit the entry for the term ‘ka’, in the article titled “Ancient Egyptian conception of the soul” and I am going to do it by means of the only way there is: by using images so that the original text can be presented translated word for word.

To give you an idea of the situation prevailing, I am quoting below a passage from the above mentioned Wikipedia article.

quote “According to ancient Egyptian creation myths, the god Atum created the world out of chaos, utilizing his own magic. Because the earth was created with magic, Egyptians believed that the world was imbued with magic and so was every living thing upon it.” unquote

The Pyramid Texts, the oldest religious texts of Humanity, inform that Atum created his children Shu and Tefnut by means of masturbation (the original text is available if you are interested) and then the ancient theologians came to preach that Atum created the whole world, followed by the Egyptologists who teach that the ancient Egyptians were a group of people obsessed with magic, which is quite unfair for the ancient Egyptians.

The author of the article brought to Wikipedia information out of a book published by the Oxford University Press. Unfortunately, that information is misleading because it is only the end part of the complete information as it should have been presented.

As you understand, the problem is a serious one! I’ll do my best to have my first edit as soon as possible, so that you may advice on how to continue.

Best Regards Dimitrios Trimijopulos (talk) 05:15, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear S0091. Thank you for the welcome. Loom forward to contributing. Omac Binson --Omac binson (talk) 14:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HELLO S0091

HELLO SIR... I AM RICK CORNWALLIS WHO MADE THE ARTICLE AINATU FAMILY. SIR I JUST WANTED TO REQUEST TO REMOVE THE SPEEDY DELETION TAG FROM THE ARTICLE.......... AS IT IS NOT REPRESENTING A SINGLE INDIVIDUAL PERSON OR FAMILY , INSTEAD IT REPRESENTS THE VERY LOW IN NUMBER TAMIL BRAHMINIC SAINT THOMAS CHRISTIANS FROM KERALA......ALSO THE SOURCES ARE ALSO STRONG... SIR PLEASE CONSIDER MY REQUEST TO REMOVE THE TAG SIR I CAN MAKE APPROPRIATE CHANGES IN THE ARTICLE FOR MAKING IT LESS SELF CENTRED...... FAITHFULLY RICK CORNWALLIS.... RICK CORNWALLIS (talk) 22:33, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @RICK CORNWALLIS: First, writing in all caps is considered shouting so please do not do that. For your immediate concern, an administrator will review the CSD request along with with contests on the talk page and determine the appropriate action to take. Now I ask that you address my concern. Have you created additional accounts? S0091 (talk) 22:43, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your help

I just published some significant changes to my sandbox, and I was wondering if you still thought I should move them into the existing page you mentioned? Thanks for the opportunity to learn and contribute, I appreciate it. MtnMrtin (talk) 03:04, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In response to notability

Hi there and thank you for the warm welcome to Wikipedia. I am excited to be here and make lots of positive contributions. I would like to post a response to an issue that you mentioned on my talk page regarding notability.

"Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources."

I understand this, the topic of the article has been the subject of reliable and independent third-party sources. I am still in the process of writing and completing my draft and will add the sources as I go along.


more information about my contribution

I was doing a college research paper on Satanism and was looking to Wikipedia for more information on a specific sect/cult of theistic satanism. I couldn't find anything about it on the website so I decided to undertake this article. My contribution will help many other students and people who are looking for sources and information when undertaking academic assignments as well as those who are interested in the subject.

Another important sect that is not mentioned by Wikipedia is the JoyofSatan. Reliable information has been published about this cult on the History Channel's official website and several news outlets following controversial suicides. I may undertake to write an in-depth article about them in the future.

Once I have added all of my sources and information I will be ready to submit my article for review.


Best Ryan Jacobson

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:S0091&oldid=986488851"